Minor White at The Getty .

[Merg Ross]

To those who attended --- were there any of his "Sequences" on display?

Thanks

[Merg Ross]

To add to my comment about Minor and his students, when he was an instructor at the California School of Fine Arts in the 1940's and 50's he seldom accompanied students into the field. He gave broad photo assignments, such as to go photograph architecture, or go photograph a district in the city, etc. while spending his time back at the classroom critiquing the work of two or three students from a previous assignment. I mention this as a contrast to the methods of other photography instructors who spent field time with their students, such as Ansel. Different methods and different results as seen by viewing student work of the two "masters".

On a personal note, I met Minor in San Francisco on the eve of his departure for Eastman House in 1953 and at the very beginning of my life in photography. Minor chose my early work for exhibition at Eastman House and later at MIT. I was never sure why he liked my work, but as I learned more about him, I concluded that he was reading some mystical meaning into my abstractions. He liked to do that. In the early 1970's Minor sponsored me on my last failed application for a Guggenheim Fellowship. He was always honest in his critiques, and his assessment on that occasion was perhaps the most meaningful of my career.

[Kirk Gittings]

That's some great connections with White, Merg.

[Toyon]

A friend had several Minor White prints from when she took a course with him at MIT. They were superb prints, and a reminder of how powerful an 8x10 silver gelatin print can be.

[Michael Gordon]

were there any of his "Sequences" on display?

There was ONE sequence on display (Sound of One Hand), which included a tag instructing the viewer "How to Read a Sequence".

I thought it was a superb exhibition.

[Michael Gordon]

A review of the exhibition from the LA Times...

[Merg Ross]

There was ONE sequence on display (Sound of One Hand), which included a tag instructing the viewer "How to Read a Sequence".

I thought it was a superb exhibition.

Thanks Michael, and for the review link also.

Merg

[David Lindquist]

A review of the exhibition from the LA Times...

Thank you very much for this link.
David

[Sal Santamaura]

Like to add the exhibition is well lighted, much better than the A.A. exhibition last month, it is also in a different room than Ansel's.

I didn't see Getty Center's Adams exhibition, so can't comment on how it compared to this one. Except to say that if Minor White: Manifestations of the Spirit is "much better lighted," then Adams work must have been in extreme darkness similar to what prompted the "Why do Edward Weston's prints suck?" thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.in...on-prints-suck).

Despite my suggestion to boycott museums that hang poorly illuminated photography, I capitulated to my wife's request that we spend our wedding anniversary yesterday visiting Getty Center. Given its massive endowment, staying away probably wouldn't have been noticed or effective anyway.

This is the third time we've been there in more than a decade. We enjoyed most of our visit, but, as with earlier ones, were once again deeply disappointed by the photography exhibition. Despite what must be a huge budget, this institution just won't go to the expense of using anti-reflection coated acrylic glazing. Since, as in most modern museums, prints are illuminated at very low levels, and the frames are attached flat against walls (paintings tilt down from their hanging wires), one ends up staring at one's own reflection rather than the photographs. Minor White didn't print as dark as Edward Weston, but many of his images do contain substantial low value areas, making for an excellent mirror effect.

There were other displeasing aspects of the presentation, such as universal use of 8-ply overmats, casting shadows on the top of some pieces; dead-center image placement in frames (even White's own private book, part of the exhibit, showed that he mounted with weighted bottoms); and the jarring practice of putting some horizontal images in vertical frames. I could have excused those latter faults if only there was adequate illumination and appropriate reflection control.

As for the rest of Getty Center, non-photographic installations are excellent and worth a visit. I've never been impressed with Gehry's monument to himself (the facility). Its biggest practical drawback is that one travels from building to building to see the entire thing. Which means that, after having walked in blazing southern California sunlight reflecting off white marble everywhere, there's a period when one's vision must adapt to the darkness inside. Then, on the way to another building, that solar retinal assault is repeated. Over and over again. Not very conducive to appreciating Getty collections.

[Drew Wiley]

They probably computer cut the mats. The only reason for the recent popularization of cutting all the mat margins the same width can be summed in a single word: "laziness". 8-ply mats were probably mandated by some insurance contract for maximum air space. That fact alone would have blown their budget to smithereens. Optically coated acrylic would be out of the question - it would make the matboard seem like toilet paper by comparison, budget-wise. Glad I got to see a lot of Minor's finest work properly lit and displayed a number of years ago. If you can't perceive the nuanced intensity of the blacks, then you miss the whole point of Minor White, with his whole mystagogue juggler of shades of gray three-ring circus.