From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 03/30/03-11:01:40 PM Z
On Sun, 30 Mar 2003, Phillip Murphy wrote:
> I agree with you Sandy, it is disconcerting to say the least.
> If a gallery buys into this thinking then one could layer a coating
> of hard gelatin over a pigment inkjet print and call it a Tri-Colour Carbon Print !
Wait a minute... if you're talking about this gallery and the Stewart
prints, that's not at all what happened. No hard gelatin involved...
Evidence suggests that this is multi-color carbon -- tho not CMYK, rather
related colors -- and also seems like the guy could have made the tissues
himself. The prints and the control are absolutely breath taking -- and
I'm not at all certain whose mistake the nomenclature is. To give the
benefit of the doubt here -- we don't know what his sources of info were.
He's native French speaking, may not have Henney & Dudley or whatever for
definitions -- and early (19th century) carbons were black. That was
possibly/probably the reference. Let's allow honest error.
After all, the fellow no matter his wizardry and expertise is NOT on the
alt photo list, nor is the dealer. And we don't know what sources he/they
had. The original explanation was that he thought folks would know what a
carbro was. And he is familiar with Outerbridge and cites Outerbridge's
book. Whatever the actual explanation, the prints are beyond quibble.
They make Iris prints look like xerox. And they are 3 by 4 feet.
One reason they are so beautiful is no gelatin layer on top. Just the
beautiful delicate "skin" of pigment.
And IMO, they blow dye transfer out of the water (or whatever you bathe
them in). They had some dye transfers from an earlier series... OK I
guess, but looking like very intense COLOR PHOTOGRAPHS -- in no way the
same magic.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 04/22/03-02:37:26 PM Z CST