Steichen Print Colour

[csant]

Probably I should add to this:

"Matte gelatin printing-out papers (produced by adding resins, starches or clays to the normal emulsion formulae) were much used in the United States and were toned by the same techniques used for matte albumen paper, hence confusion between the two materials is possible."

http://albumen.conservation-us.org/l...lly/chap5.html

…which might explain the silver gelatin label on the Steichen prints.

[Justin Cormack]

Picked up a copy of the book "Stieglitz Steichen and Strand" recently published by MOMA when in NYC a few months ago and was struck by the beautiful tonal quality of the prints. I especially like the olive cast of many of Steichen prints including "Brancusi's Studio". Assuming these are accurately reproduced in the book, any idea if this was a result of the paper used or applied technique (toning etc.)? Some of Sudek's prints have the same look and I myself was able to achieve it using Neogaz paper years ago. I imagine not everyone would like this look, though! BTW the Wikipedia rendering of the above photograph is pretty bland and cast-free! BTW2, this is a terrific book!

Thanks for the book recommendation, have ordered it. Would love to have seen the exhibition.

[Brian Ellis]

It's just you, nobody else ever liked their work. Who are these guys anyhow? : - )

Just kidding of course. I've always admired the look that these photographers and others achieved. In fact that admiration led me to spend a couple years with gum bichromate and Van dyke brown. Gum is a great process but very demanding in terms of time, space, and technique. Van dyke brown is much easier and is also a beautiful process (the only process other than ink jet printing with which I've been able to print a 21-step wedge that showed separation in each of the 21 steps).

[John Jarosz]

I saw the show in NYC. I feel I was pretty aware of Strand and Steiglitz' work in the early part of the century, but my opinion of Steichen was always clouded by his later work that I didn't like. His early prints and portraits were the highlight of the show for me. Changed my opinion of him. And I think the book is as good a replica of the works that were mounted as could be expected. I don't think there would be any volume sales of a $200 book. I had hoped that the show might travel, but everything in it was from the Met's collection so I'm not too optimistic of them allowing it.

I think all those early guys were by necessity experimenters with print materials. In the course of their experimentation I'm sure they kept a lot of their secrets to themselves.

John

[Tom J McDonald]

Brandt... now there is an artist.