>>> schrammrus@hotmail.com 03/17/05 11:03 AM >>>
>>You have some interesting ideas I would like to explore further with
you off list.<<
I'd like that Bob, either on or offlist. I don't know what else I could
add though without getting too whiney about the whole thing though.
Someone suggested the list might do well with the occasional diversion
from technical topics to more philosophical ones, and I tend to agree
with that. So, I pursued the onlist discussion a bit more insistently
than I normally would for that reason. Hopefully, others found it food
for thought and a pleasant diversion. I'd like to see more of the same
in the future but if there are objections I'd be happy to continue
offlist.
Philosophically, I also find it interesting that those of us with a
background in the sciences may find ourselves embracing the historic
photographic processes along with or at the exclusion of the new
technologies. I know I have tried the digital path and found that I
just don't enjoy it like I do with the handmade print processes.
There's no value judgement there. Its just like my preference for
painting in oils to watercolors. Part of my enjoyment in that medium is
investigating Old Masters' techniques and materials (white lead & black
oil, etc.) in an age of latex and acrylic and "painting" software. I
guess that's just the scientist/alchemist in me balancing the cavorting
internal artist. For me, the creation of the artwork in terms of
process is more rewarding than the finished piece.
In the past few months I've made a couple of the best technical
alternative process prints I've ever made. But, they were in part
digitally accomplished and in spite of their appearance and appeal to
others, they somehow leave me affectively flat. On the other hand, the
most minor well-executed brushstroke on a huge canvas can mesmerize me.
joe
Received on Thu Mar 17 13:20:20 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 04/08/05-09:31:01 AM Z CST