From: Kate Mahoney (kateb@paradise.net.nz)
Date: 09/28/03-04:27:08 AM Z
I'm trying to photograph my new work which I suppose exhibits some of the
characteristics of dags (btw here in the antipodes "dags" are something that
hang off sheeps' rears) in that the image is behind glass and needs
reflected light to view properly. I'm having the most God-damn awful time
getting any decent pics because (a) they are very difficult to focus on as
the depth of the glass seems to interfere with both manual and auto-focus
and (b) it seems near-impossible to get the right lighting to reflect back
at just the right angle. I've tried diffuse natural light and diffuse
artificial light in the studio. I'm actually using a digital camera because
the time & expense of film is just too much given the failure rate. It's
very hit & miss. I've thought of using a light tent but if I want reflected
light it seems a bit silly....what do you all think????? Btw I was blown
away by the Close/ Spagnolli work in Lyle Rexer's book.
Kate Mahoney
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phillip Murphy" <pmurf@bellsouth.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2003 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: The Eerie Exactness of the Daguerrotype (Review in NY Times)
> Translations into book plates from the original can be exquisite,
absolutely.
>
> The thing that troubles me for some reason about the Chuck Close dags is
> that they are actually Jerry Spagnolli's Daguerreotypes. I've not seen
him
> credited for this work. Perhaps he has, I've just never seen it.
>
> I've noticed that when I look at pictures of Daguerreotypes in books
> after having looked at actual Dags for an hour or so, the pictures in
> the book takes on a deeper dimension than if I've just taken the book
> from a shelf at random and started viewing them. Has anyone else
> noticed this phenomena after viewing prints from various media?
>
> -Phillip
>
> Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Phillip Murphy wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > The added shame of poor gallery exhibition of Daguerreotypes is that
the
> > > medium poorly translates into book pages
> >
> > But it can be translated exquisitely into book pages given the proper
> > expertise (or maybe it's liberty?). I think of the Chuck Close dags in
> > Lyle Rexer's Antiquarian book... I found them more remarkable than the
> > originals which I saw well lighted (as far as I, a non-expert, could
tell)
> > in the gallery show.
> >
> > J.
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/03-03:09:00 PM Z CST