Re: Opacity of digital negative substrates, was Re: Gum a la Sam Wang

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Ed Stander wrote:

> I loves the fights that go on when science meets art.
>
> Standarization don't necessarily mean the loss of creativity. Imagine, for
> example,
> that every time one makes a print on Kodak paper it comes out different....

YOU MEAN IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO? IN FACT, MY DEAR SIR, IF YOU CHANGE YOUR
DEVELOPER, YOUR DEVELOPING TIMES, YOUR AGITATION, and/or YOUR EXPOSURE,
FOR STARTERS, IT WILL COME OUT DIFFERENT. BUT WE ARE, REMEMBER?,
POST-FACTORY HERE. AND PLEASE EXCUSE THE SHOUTING. I FORGOT TO TAKE THE
CAPS LOCK off.

Meanwhile, I fear you contradict yourself when you say chance is where
most Nobel Prizes come from. The flexibility of gum courts chance, or
allows it to happen. So when do they announce the Nobels for gum? (Tho I
was thinking more in terms of a Pullitzer.)

cheers,

Judy,

> Similarly, simple adherence to the rules leaves chance out in the cold.
> That's where most Nobel Prizes come from, despite what the Egos say.
>
> So c'mon guys (and womenfolk), mix with abandon, but don't orphan the
> results.
> Yours in philosophy - Ed
>
Received on Mon Dec 1 01:52:21 2003