Re: Learning, loooong post

Chris

Just as I said to Sandy, our approaches seem much the same.

Technique is important but it is not all.

Beauty is important.

I was accused in an article once of learning from my students. My reply was
that it is a fool who does not.

As to being 'patronising', the 'motherly stance' can have that effect.

As to my web site, it is clearly set out so that the page on gum printing is
easy to find. Others seem to find it helpful as I get many thousands of 'hits'
a week with a lot of downloads. I have been giving away all this information
for many many years. Recently, I found a new things which involved a lot of
time and expense. Is it so wrong for me to want to recover the cost ?

I have not been the only one here to suggest that Mike Ware's hypothesis was
open to question. I have known Mike for a long time; he does tend to
overcomplicate things. And as I said recently,the academic support that he will bring
to support his comments can sometimes be proved wrong by a simple test.

Is it wrong to suggest a reason when someone asks for comment on a
phenomenon? As a further example you comment on the observation that dichromate runs out
of the print quickly when it is first put in the water. This is a simple
technical issue.. The dichromate is soluble and the gum is porous. so that when
the light has done its job, the dichromate runs away in the water leaving
behind the gum which has been rendered insoluble.

You say:

I think the Pictorial style is not only valid but alive and well, in our
increasing need
for a return to beauty in this world,,,,,

This is what I have been preaching for many years..

I wish you all success with your gum printing and with your students. Your
approach to teaching appears very similar to my own.

Terry

In a message dated 8/4/06 5:01:17 pm, zphoto@montana.net writes:

> Good morning!
>
> Since my name has been entered into this convo I feel I have to clear up a
> couple things.
>
> Somehow we have segued from the original issue:
>
> Does the gum harden top down or bottom up?
>
> Not that huge segues are a bad thing, mind you, as I'll stay on topic at
> first and then segue, below, but the only reason I mentioned the separation
> of the dichromate as a quirky observation was in reference to Katharine's
> intriguing post about Ware's theory that the dichromate migrates to the
> surface of the paper.
>
> You replied to that email with a "take a workshop from me or look at my
> website" answer, as if the observation I made indicated a technical problem.
> Sandy, who was at my thesis show because he teaches at Clemson where it was,
> was just assuring you it was not a technical issue, and I would have to say
> the same. It is merely an observation I shared in wondering if it supports
> Mike's hypothesis.
>
> In reference to Judy's post, too, I find it odd that dichromate, when you
> place an exposed print in water to develop, immediately leaches out of the
> print in the first 30 seconds.  I'm sure a scientist could say why--it's
> more water soluble or whatever the case may be.  I'll leave those kinds of
> issues of why something happens to scientists one of these days who take up
> the gum printing cause. Until then, one thing this list HAS taught me if not
> the actual answer was never to presume.
>
> Now I'm gonna take a motherly stance here, and counsel you that sometimes
> when an alt lister answers a question with a "buy my book" or "take my
> workshop" approach it comes off....a bit patronizing.  However, if one has a
> website, and chooses to answer a particular question with a given URL as
> Katharine does at times, that is wonderful because it is helpful,
> instructive, and also allows us to compare "apples to apples" so to speak
> instead of forking out cash.  It would help if you would give us a URL from
> your website to direct us to a particular page and a particular answer
> instead of a blanket "check my website" approach.
>
> At other times, we should be reaaaalllly cautious at who we say "take my
> workshop" to...how would Dan Burkholder react if I didn't know who he was
> and told him to take my digineg class this summer?  When I first got on this
> list and realized the bigwigs on it I was shocked--mortified, actually, at
> times. BTW Dan, if you are reading this, two of my students used your
> pigment over platinum method and produced incredible prints.  I was blown
> away--one is doing a "Redhead" project and guess what is colored.  I just
> love it when I have students that teach me things.
>
> But, back to learning:  the bottom line is and has always been, the proof is
> in the pudding. Are someone's gums effective at communicating the artist's
> intent? I actually don't think that has much to do with technique just as
> being a good photographer has nothing to do with a BFA or MFA.
>
> One of my favorite gum prints of the semester is a little teeny 2x4 inch
> tricolor that one of my students did that is an absolute FAILURE of
> technique--way too yellow, the magenta layer was a flaking mess, but it is
> this little teeny self portrait tight shot of her face and it is gorgeous.
> I asked the class as a whole, what grade would you give this?  They all said
> "10".  So much for technique.  If we could only be so lucky as to have our
> technically perfect gum prints be labeled a "10".
>
> To take this back to the "learning" subject line, in class last week I gave
> a Powerpoint lecture on the Pictorialist style, and asked the question
> theoretically, does this style still have a place today or do we consider it
> "schmaltzy"?  Has it lost its meaning?  (I don't answer these questions, I
> just ask.) I used one of our techie students as an example and said, "Could
> you imagine Camden doing pictorial imagery?"  They all shook their head.  I
> was posing this question within the overarching question of what is the
> current "style" of this generation that we will look back on a hundred years
> down the road and label "Ohhhh, that's soooo like 2000".
>
> After class Camden came into my office and said that the Pictorial style was
> what attracted him to photography!  The class pegged him wrong, and we had a
> good laugh.  And, if you want to know my opinion on this, I think the
> Pictorial style is not only valid but alive and well, in our increasing need
> for a return to beauty in this world and our ability to now easily blur
> stuff in Photoshop.  Blur ROCKS.
>
> I'm sorry, y'all, I just have to keep talking about my students because they
> are just too cool for words...that's where my pride shows through...
> My 2 cents.
> Chris
>
Received on Sat Apr 8 13:14:56 2006