Re: And how sharp I am was/Re: Temperaprint & Gum

I'm withdrawing from the listserv. Repeated entreaties from the coordinator
to treat each other with civility have gone unheeded, and the ratio of real
information to personal sniping has dropped over the months I have been
reading.

"Pedantic" is a term that relates to teaching and learning, and I have
learned how people's inhibitions are down when they are sheltered by the
anonymity of the Web.

BAK

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christina Z. Anderson" <zphoto@bellsouth.net>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 6:42 AM
Subject: Re: And how sharp I am was/Re: Temperaprint & Gum

> <Judy said, big snip> I don't think it's individuals who need super
archival
> or super sharp to
> > bolster confidence (although obviously on this list some are more
> > concerned with it than others). I have the sense that it's the field as
a
> > whole, that it has become so engrained and automatic, those who wish to
be
> > "good" photographers internalize the value(s).
>
> I agree it's the field, and is the legacy of the history of the medium.
Two
> things were of great concern, over and over in the BJP: sharpness of
detail
> most, and, of course, permanency. Photos faded, negative varnish peeled
and
> bubbled...gum was supplanted by carbon which was sharper in detail, or
> compared with albumen and never measured up...I feel so sorry for gum
> because it was like the forgotten or tossed out bastard child.
>
> Having taught in a photo department with 200 majors, archivalness was
> certainly an issue, especially when we discovered that for the last three
> years the lab tech had been diluting the fixer wrongly.
>
> Seeing Bechers' work at the Walker Art Center in Mpls I was appalled to
see
> spots of silvering out creeping in their work.
>
> The issue of archivalness of RC paper has continually been a concern.
>
> The issue of fugitive colors and yellowing paper is also of great concern
> in watercolor painting, so it isn't just confined to photography. In my
> painting major fat over lean was discussed as a method of preventing
> cracking in the long term.
>
> Archivalness is also a major issue in the digital realm.
>
> I personally think it is a sign of the times; we want our art to last.
> We've seen art that doesn't, especially photography now that it is over
160
> years old. Maybe it's tied up in hubris, or the anxiety of the times,
but
> I like to think it is about quality and investment and care.
>
> As far as sharpness, Gerhard Richter has been of great influence to me in
my
> use of blur. Use of blur (selective focus, too) has been the one change
in
> advertising photography since Irving Penn revolutionized it with his spare
> style of sharp and clean.
>
> I agree with John, Photographist; there are many negatives I never printed
> when I first started photography because they were blurry; luckily I did
not
> throw them away, and am printing them now.
>
> Sharp/detail and fuzz are not an either/or proposition. Archivalness is
> moreso; witness the loss of the 2 million dollar Marc Quinn sculpture head
> of his own frozen blood that melted all over Saatchi's floor when the
> workmen turned off the freezer accidentally. This is one mere example
among
> many curatorial nightmares.
>
> My two cents, at 6:30 AM when I haven't had more than half a cup of
> coffee...
> Chris
>
Received on Mon Feb 2 06:34:47 2004