Quote Originally Posted by Henry Ambrose View Post
You seem to operate from an assumption that there examples of Kertsz's prints of different sizes just waiting to be hung on display. I'm saying the work is what it is and the show was hung with what they had to hang.
That's a practical concern that constrains the situation, and as I said I'm no expert on his work. I wish you'd brought that up earlier instead of indirectly accusing me of suggesting mural-sized prints as an alternative. You kept coming back to the alternative of a medium-format-sized contact print being a mural, and that is a false choice. Apparently, even a modest 5x7 print is a false choice, but I didn't know that.

Perhaps, in that case, the gallery or museum needs to think of a different way to display them. Maybe instead of hanging them on the wall, they could display them behind glass at counter level, perhaps angled, which would allow viewers to get right up to them and see them even with bifocals or reading glasses. In any case, something about the display made it hard to see, as evidenced by the existence of this thread.

The fact that there are no larger alternatives available also moots the question of the photographer's intentions, it seems to me.

Rick "not trying to be argumentative, but seeing interesting issues" Denney