From: Katharine Thayer (kthayer@pacifier.com)
Date: 09/28/03-10:06:55 PM Z
A couple other things I meant to say:
1. I think it may say this somewhere on the site, but I purposely didn't
include many examples of gum prints that look like the stereotypical gum
print, although I've made a fair amount of them, because I assume that
people know what those look like. I wanted to show prints that don't
look that way.
2. I'm not making any claim that my prints disprove the myth about gum
and detail, because surface detail isn't my thing. What I strive to
capture in a photograph is simple abstract shapes, a quality of light,
or a gesture, not surface detail. I do have a little tutorial about gum
and detail. but in general, Dave Rose's work is a better example of
3. One thing I want people to take from this is that gum is simple and
fun to do, not difficult and complicated. Sam Wang said it so well a
while back when he said (I hope I don't mangle this too much, Sam) that
printing gum is like riding a bicycle; before you know how to do it, it
seems difficult, but once you learn how, it's really simple. And there's
not much point in talking about it, because the only way you learn how
to do it is by doing it. I couldn't agree more.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/03-03:09:00 PM Z CST