Eliot Porter

[gth]

Yesterday I had the fortune to come across an Eliot Porter book, which promptly became mine. (Pict of Front cover below)

It's a biography book, titled simply "Eliot Porter" and has a quite lengthy biography written by EP himself and in the back 129 gorgeous plates of a selection of his prints. The little I have read so far of his bio, it seems to be a more of a timeline of his life, rather than a discussion of his techniques and artistic choices.

I'd like to bring up a few questions about his (to me) remarkable work.

The pictures and subdued colour palette of these prints resonates with me, perhaps because the i recognize that light, from the Swedish woods, to the light in a Redwood grove or in a deep Canadian hardwood forest.

1. First of, I don't think I have see any of his prints in real life so I don't know if the reproductions in the book have "faded"..... they are certainly not "faint" - or if they indeed a valid view of how he printed. It's a rich palette of colour, with (to me) a lot of tonal range, although frankly I don't really know what I mean when I say "tonal range".

2. The listing of the plates in the back of the book, says nothing about what film used nor camera or lenses, but all his colour prints are dye transfer prints!!!

From one website I gleaned the information that he was using Kodachrome, which considering the timespan he worked in is not surprising. He also used 4x5 and strobes for his bird pictures. That's as far as I am right now.

It would be great get get more info on EP, his life, techniques and printing ability. Did he do his own dye transfers for instance? Some of you must have been contemporaries with him in his latter years and your early career. Anyone today that print in the EP style?

3. How is he considered, by the photographer and art communities today?

4. As a side issue, considering the time this book was printed (1987) how were his dye transfer prints captured to the print process? Copy camera? Scanning?

5. It's a bit sobering if these prints were made be techniques largely lost, that is KodaChrome and Dye Transfer? How would you print these today and stay true to Eliot Porter's vision?

97437

[Brian Ellis]

I don't know the answers to most of your questions but I've always understood that he was a master dye transfer printer and did his own printing. As for his regard in the "art" community, not very high unless it's changed in recent years.

[Bill Burk]

I have the paperback "In Wilderness..." which I enjoy for the Thoreau quotes interspersed with Eliot Porter photographs.

I have no problem holding them in equal esteem for their poetry.

[JW Dewdney]

Hmmm... I've always had the impression Porter was always considered a real 'master' much along the lines of Ansel Adams or anyone else - so I'm not sure where Brian's coming from. VERY HIGHLY respected and a favorite of many. Dye transfer was always 'his thing' - I think he shot on color transparency film (could be neg. though) and used the standard kodak dye transfer process to make his separations - since he worked this way- (CMYK plates) - it was a very easy jump to use positive copies of the same plates (on film) to print the book etc... straight up.

[JW Dewdney]

he used a variation of the following process however:

http://www.airwreck.com/dnloads/E80.pdf

[Kirk Gittings]

Hmmm... I've always had the impression Porter was always considered a real 'master' much along the lines of Ansel Adams or anyone else - so I'm not sure where Brian's coming from. VERY HIGHLY respected and a favorite of many. Dye transfer was always 'his thing' - I think he shot on color transparency film (could be neg. though) and used the standard kodak dye transfer process to make his separations - since he worked this way- (CMYK plates) - it was a very easy jump to use positive copies of the same plates (on film) to print the book etc... straight up.

No Brian is right at least in the "high" art academic crowd. UNM had first shot at his archives but they had denigrated him so often that he sent them to Texas. Seriously? That is what I heard from an inside source and I had personally heard the denigrations as far back as the early 70s and heard they had found their way back to Porter.

[Doug Howk]

There is a good, though brief, review of Porter at TOP by Geoff Wittig. Apparently, the print reproductions in various Porter books varied from mediocre to superb with the "In the Realm of Nature" earning the latter from Geoff. Also Porter's color pallete changed over time. I have 2 of Porter's books which I enjoy greatly (Intimate Landscapes & Iceland); and they vary with Intimate Landscape being almost a pastel.

[gth]

Sotheby's Auction April 2013:

"ELIOT PORTER
1901-1990
SELECTED NATURE STUDIES
Estimate: 8,000 - 12,000 USD
LOT SOLD. 8,125 USD (Hammer Price with Buyer's Premium)
a group of 3 mural-sized dye-transfer prints, comprising 'Redbud Tree in Bottom Land, Red River Gorge, Kentucky,' 'Foxtail Grass, Lake City, Colorado,' and 'Pool in Brook, Pond Brook, New Hampshire,' each mounted, signed in pencil on the mount, framed, 1953-68, printed later (3)
Each approximately 36½ by 29¾ in. (92.7 by 75.6 cm.)"

Note size of those dye transfer prints!

$8,000 for three prints ..... how does that compare.....

Why was he denigrated, art politics or some serious critique?

[paulr]

Porter was a big deal a long time ago. He was a part (though maybe not an influential one) of the modernist crowd that Stieglitz showed at An American Place. He was also probably the first notable person to produce bodies of photographic work in color. Others dabbled, but he was a real early adopter.

His work doesn't seem to have held up so well compared with his contemporaries'. The color pictures are more notable for being color pictures than for actually doing anything remarkable with color. They're pretty, for sure, and not as cloying as most calendar phtography, but it seems most contempoary artists interested in color have chosen other pioneers to study, like Shore and Eggleston.

[Sal Santamaura]

...As for his regard in the "art" community, not very high unless it's changed in recent years.


...Brian is right at least in the "high" art academic crowd...Yet another reason to totally ignore "art" and those who claim to be arbiters of it. If the OP finds Porter's work remarkable, he should enjoy it. No other opinions ought matter to him.

[paulr]

Yet another reason to totally ignore "art" and those who claim to be arbiters of it. If the OP finds Porter's work remarkable, he should enjoy it. No other opinions ought matter to him.

Except that he asked!

[Oren Grad]

It would be great get get more info on EP, his life, techniques and printing ability.

http://www.cartermuseum.org/collections/porter/index.php

[Sal Santamaura]

Except that he asked!Yes, that was my point to him. He shouldn't bother asking -- just enjoy it. Changing his perception of Porter's work based what others said/say about is not a positive way to live life, in my opinion. Unless, of course, he's a lemming and not a human. :)

[KJ Smith]

The book you have was produced in association with the Amon Carter museum, in Ft Worth Texas.

It was published right around the time Dr. Porter announced that his archive would be donated to them.

( It is my understanding that UNM had them, but on one of his visits he found them sitting in a hallway in the original boxes he sent them in, he then had them removed and sent to the Amon Carter.)

Dr. Porter gave a symposium at the time of the announcement, this book was produced for that. I was lucky enough to attend.

Even though his health was not great, after his presentation, he sat there and autographed copies for every person who purchased one.

I have always thought it strange that his work is not very highly valued.

While the colors in his prints are not the vibrant colors that are more the norm now, they are very pleasing and more realistic.

For those who don't know, the Amon Carter (http://www.cartermuseum.org/), one of the best collections of photography in the south.

The After Image (http://www.afterimagegallery.com/porterintimatelandscapes.htm) has examples of his work for sale.

[jp]

Porter's books vary in print quality; probably 80% of them are mediocre. The dye-transfer prints in real life are stunning and unmistakable. The Portland (Maine) Museum of Art had a special exhibit of them a few years ago, and I enjoyed it very much.

He's more artist inspiring than Peter Lik, Porter kind of crosses between art and conservation, but didn't have a need to boost ego sell himself like some contemporaries.

They guy was a master at color printing, but didn't do every dye transfer print himself; he had someone help at times who is equally good printer.

I really like the "in wildness" book too. It made me homesick of Maine. Because of the complexity of backgrounds and light, it's really tough to shoot the Maine woods and make it look as simple and clean as Porter has done. It's like being there, but not all dolled or drama'd up.

[KJ Smith]

As for his regard in the "art" community, not very high unless it's changed in recent years.


Dr. Porter passed in Nov. 1990.

[gth]

Yes, that was my point to him. He shouldn't bother asking -- just enjoy it. Changing his perception of Porter's work based what others said/say about is not a positive way to live life, in my opinion. Unless, of course, he's a lemming and not a human. :)

Sal, I might have been unclear about my motivation. I do enjoy his work - so far- and it speaks to me as I said in my original posting. I was not seeking other opinions in order to validate mine, or change it, but rather to learn how EP's work has held up, how he has been received over time, and which photographers he might have inspired.

To me his work contains hues and palettes you don't see munch of, and to me it is very realistic to my minds eye. And when I say "realistic" it's on the level of hyper realistic or meta realistic to use jargon. Emotionally realistic?

To me much of colour photographs today uses a "kindergarten" crayon palette that emits in seemingly narrow band spectra. HIgh impact, but then you go blind.

I would like to achieve EP's palette and I have been been close..... well that's close but no cigar, if you know what I mean. But it gives me some hope.

[JW Dewdney]

No Brian is right at least in the "high" art academic crowd. UNM had first shot at his archives but they had denigrated him so often that he sent them to Texas. Seriously? That is what I heard from an inside source and I had personally heard the denigrations as far back as the early 70s and heard they had found their way back to Porter.

Well there are at least a FEW different cultures within the photography world, Kirk - I was assuming he was referring to the 'high art' culture of the world this forum concerns itself with (i.e. ansel adams, weston, john sexton and all that - I guess i would call those the 'fine print crowd') so there was that proviso there I guess.

[Keith Fleming]

Porter's color prints are not as saturated as is the norm today. The just look different and lacking to the eyes of modern viewers. My guess is that in time things will change, and Porter will be "discovered" again by a later generation. Remember that Moby Dick was an obscure, forgotten novel for a few decades until "discovered" and placed in the pantheon of great American literature.

Keith

[Wayne]

Porter's original prints are beautiful, as others have said. I always wondered about those book reproductions, some are good and some not so good. I've not seen a bad print, though I haven't seen larger numbers of them. The ones I've seen are refreshingly subtle and realistic and seem to have depth.

[Robert Brummitt]

I've always been a fan of Mr. Porter and his work. He was an early influence for me. I was working in a commercial photo lab that had dye transfer chemicals, matrices and a marble plate. I called Charlie Cramer to teach me. We were about to go forward when Kodak discontinued the material. I traded what I had to Charlie and went back to internegs and C-prints.
I saw the book in the original post and had to have a copy. I bought mine thru the Nature Conservancy. It has a fly page that is signed.
Elliot Porter will always have a special place with me.

[Kirk Gittings]

Well there are at least a FEW different cultures within the photography world, Kirk - I was assuming he was referring to the 'high art' culture of the world this forum concerns itself with (i.e. ansel adams, weston, john sexton and all that - I guess i would call those the 'fine print crowd') so there was that proviso there I guess.

Maybe I'm just tired but I cannot decipher this.

[JW Dewdney]

Maybe I'm just tired but I cannot decipher this.

Sorry- probably being overly subtle. You seemed to acknowledge yourself that there was a separation between the craft oriented traditional photographic community and then the academic based one that caters more to the 'avant-garde'. I was simply unsure which of these communities he was addressing by the language he used. Seems to me anyway - but it's probably moot... if you two are in agreement it's clear enough for me.

[jp]

To me his work contains hues and palettes you don't see munch of, and to me it is very realistic to my minds eye. And when I say "realistic" it's on the level of hyper realistic or meta realistic to use jargon. Emotionally realistic?

I would like to achieve EP's palette and I have been been close..... well that's close but no cigar, if you know what I mean. But it gives me some hope.

I would say it's both realistic and emotionally realistic, at least based on the Maine stuff. I haven't traveled to the others areas he's photographed.

I've gotten close with Ektar color negative film. eg. http://www.flickr.com/photos/13759696@N02/9036423803/ but it's more or equally about the skill in scanning/printing probably.

[Noah B]

I just wrote a research paper on him this past semseter and I watched a couple videos as well. He did make his own dye transfer prints and had his own darkroom. One video I saw he explained the whole process and brought the film crew into his darkroom, which was cool. My favorite pictures by him are the birds, they're great. GTH - the book you picked up is wonderful, the first part where he's writing about his life is really interesting and really funny at times (I laughed out loud). He seemed like a genuine person, I think the MoMA has some of his prints up right now.

[Wayne]

I would say it's both realistic and emotionally realistic, at least based on the Maine stuff. I haven't traveled to the others areas he's photographed.

I've gotten close with Ektar color negative film. eg. http://www.flickr.com/photos/13759696@N02/9036423803/ but it's more or equally about the skill in scanning/printing probably.

Porter had a scanner?

[jp]

Porter had a scanner?
I bet they had one to listen to ambulances with.

My response was to someone looking for contemporary means.

[Brian Ellis]

Sotheby's Auction April 2013:

"ELIOT PORTER
1901-1990
SELECTED NATURE STUDIES
Estimate: 8,000 - 12,000 USD
LOT SOLD. 8,125 USD (Hammer Price with Buyer's Premium)
a group of 3 mural-sized dye-transfer prints, comprising 'Redbud Tree in Bottom Land, Red River Gorge, Kentucky,' 'Foxtail Grass, Lake City, Colorado,' and 'Pool in Brook, Pond Brook, New Hampshire,' each mounted, signed in pencil on the mount, framed, 1953-68, printed later (3)
Each approximately 36½ by 29¾ in. (92.7 by 75.6 cm.)"

Note size of those dye transfer prints!

$8,000 for three prints ..... how does that compare.....

Why was he denigrated, art politics or some serious critique?

He was denigrated partly because he was working in color at a time when b&w was considered the photographic "artist's" medium, partly because traditional landscapes, birds, animals, etc. in general haven't been considered proper subjects for serious photographic artists by the "high art" crowd (by which I mean galleries, museums, critics, curators, academics, and serious collectors). Which isn't to say he hasn't been popular, he has been popular, just not with those sorts of people.

I suspect his family's wealth may also have played into it on a subjective basis. Academics, critics, etc. tend to like the image of the struggling artist living in a garret and surviving on Sterno and bread rather than an artist whose family was so wealthy that they could afford to buy their own island and build a mansion on it for summer vacations.

[Bill_1856]

Great technician, but with an occasion exception (Kentucky dogwood) his work is repetitious and visually boring. IMO.

[Sal Santamaura]

Yes, that was my point to him. He shouldn't bother asking -- just enjoy it. Changing his perception of Porter's work based what others said/say about is not a positive way to live life, in my opinion. Unless, of course, he's a lemming and not a human. :)


...I might have been unclear about my motivation. I do enjoy his work - so far- and it speaks to me as I said in my original posting...That's good to hear.


...I was not seeking other opinions in order to validate mine, or change it, but rather to learn how EP's work has held up, how he has been received over time, and which photographers he might have inspired...In my opinion, if you're doing that as an academic pursuit (not necessarily formally via a school; satisfying personal curiosity counts too), great. Just as long as what you discover doesn't influence how you respond to his work.


...To me his work contains hues and palettes you don't see munch of, and to me it is very realistic to my minds eye. And when I say "realistic" it's on the level of hyper realistic or meta realistic to use jargon. Emotionally realistic?

To me much of colour photographs today uses a "kindergarten" crayon palette that emits in seemingly narrow band spectra. High impact, but then you go blind...We share a lack of appreciation for the "Velveeta look." While I only work in black and white, Porter's color has always been beautifully done to my eye. Except I could never get past the unsharpness of dye transfer prints. :) However, it's only your way of seeing that should be reflected in your own work, whether I or anyone else agree with it.


...I would like to achieve EP's palette and I have been been close..... well that's close but no cigar, if you know what I mean. But it gives me some hope.Others who do work in color today are qualified to help you with that. Some have posted in this thread. Best wishes on achieving your vision.

[Bruce Watson]

I have a really nice copy of that book, and an original dye transfer print of plate 30. The print just crushes the reproduction. It's absolutely beautiful, and shows full control of shadows, highlights, individual hues, and saturations. Dye Transfer printing is an incredibly difficult and time consuming task, and Porter was a true master of it.

Porter's problem, if he had one, is that he came from a privileged background. He had money, he was well educated, and he had the audacity to use this as the base to do what he wanted. He wasn't indoctrinated by the art establishment (he had a medical degree). He didn't have to curry favor with the art establishment (he didn't want to be a curator or a professor), and apparently didn't worry too much about what they thought -- he made photographs that moved him. He had a vision, and he stayed true to it, regardless. Since the art establishment wasn't able to exert much influence on Porter they either denigrated him or ignored him. The fact that he achieved a fair level of popularity and acceptance without their help and/or blessing probably just made this relationship worse. His embrace of color clearly upset the establishment players for example.

He was both a pioneer of color, and a master of dye transfer printing, in a B&W age. For better or worse, this made him a fringe player.

Part of what you get with dye transfer is control. The closest you can get to this level of control today is ink jet printing. I'm pretty confident that were Porter alive and working today, he'd be ink jet printing. But we'll never know, because he's not alive and working today.

Part of what Porter showed us is that a successful color nature photograph isn't usually about individual hues or high saturations. It's about balance and the relationships between colors. The apple tree leaves in my print are perhaps a bit more blue in some areas than you might see in real life, but they work perfectly with the color of the apples. The composition itself is beautifully balanced, and the colors work to support and extend that. That was his style, it's what makes his prints easily identifiable from across a room.

Porter may not have influenced many in the art world, and he may not have a lot of followers. But he clearly pioneered the way, and he certainly influenced me. He's one of the reasons I picked up an LF camera in the first place. Fat lot of good it's done me. :rolleyes:

[gth]

I just wrote a research paper on him this past semseter and I watched a couple videos as well. He did make his own dye transfer prints and had his own darkroom. One video I saw he explained the whole process and brought the film crew into his darkroom, which was cool. My favorite pictures by him are the birds, they're great. GTH - the book you picked up is wonderful, the first part where he's writing about his life is really interesting and really funny at times (I laughed out loud). He seemed like a genuine person, I think the MoMA has some of his prints up right now.

I would love to see those videos of his darkroom! Do you know were they are available?

I went on YouTube but could only find these, which do not show his technique, but rather a retrospective of his work... and not very well made frankly..

http://youtu.be/mAR4RT_ZNA8


http://youtu.be/w1TdehbTk2U

[Bill Burk]

When it comes to photography/photographers I look up to as something I want to achieve/someone I admire, I don't consider external factors like "the art world".

If Eliot Porter's works are going for such reasonable prices, I take this thread as a heads-up that maybe it's not out of my reach. I'd like to have the "fairy napkins" on my wall...

I also admire George Fiske, whose works from 1884 go for around $175

There are good bargains to be had.

[gth]

When it comes to photography/photographers I look up to as something I want to achieve/someone I admire, I don't consider external factors like "the art world".

If Eliot Porter's works are going for such reasonable prices, I take this thread as a heads-up that maybe it's not out of my reach. I'd like to have the "fairy napkins" on my wall...

I also admire George Fiske, whose works from 1884 go for around $175

There are good bargains to be had.

Exactly what I was thinking!!

At $1,500 - $3,000 going rate for an Eliot Porter, it wouldn't be a weekly purchase, but over some time, I think I could scrape up some change to acquire a print or two.
That they are dye-transfers certainly add to the allure....

On the other hand, that opens up the can of worms about purchasing prints by photographers no longer with us, vs contemporaries, that can use the $$ - NOW.

In any case, I need to start purchasing prints........ looking at REAL prints is a key to appreciating photography..... to state the obvious.....

[Heroique]

And as a one time director of the Sierra Club, Porter must have felt awkward about his brother in law, Michael Straus (who married Porter’s sister). The very rich Straus, as Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, killed a lot of wild rivers with his gigantic public dams. Leaves one curious about any felt tension between the two at the holiday dinner table. Maybe since Porter had an advanced engineering degree – in addition to his medical degree – he and Straus found some middle ground to discuss over the cranberry sauce. Certainly off limits was the topic of Thoreau – who is amply quoted in the famous Porter book, In Wildness is the Preservation of the World (1962). Monty Python would have had fun with all this.

Biography aside, I’ve always admired both Porter’s color work and conservation work.

[gth]

I found a video presentation of the Eliot Porter book I purchased on Friday.
Strange!

http://vimeo.com/22520107

[Brian Ellis]

Dr. Porter passed in Nov. 1990.

What's that have to do with opinions about his work changing? Opinions about artists often change, in some cases centuries after their death.

[KJ Smith]

What's that have to do with opinions about his work changing? Opinions about artists often change, in some cases centuries after their death.

Sorry, miss read your post, big difference between "in" and "on".

[gth]

http://www.cartermuseum.org/collections/porter/index.php

WOW.... how else to put it.... checked out the link.....

Quote...... I wonder if the museum has the funds to curate this collection properly?

In 1990 Eliot Porter bequeathed his professional archives to the Amon Carter Museum. The core of this generous gift consists of approximately 7,500 original dye transfer, color photographic prints and 1,800 gelatin silver, black-and-white photographic prints covering the breadth of his career. Supplementing these prints are the artist’s 84,000 original color transparencies and slides; 4,400 black-and-white negatives; the photographic components he created in the process of making his dye transfer prints; and approximately 2,600 work prints. The collection also holds copies of the artist’s books, portfolios, and albums; approximately forty linear feet of business papers and correspondence; his 1,100-volume professional library; a small assortment of family photographs; photographs given to the artist by friends and associates; some of his dye transfer printing equipment; and his work table. This collection guide lists and describes these various components, while offering an extensive sampling of the artist’s photographs.

end quote....

How long would his dye-transfer matrixes last.... when was the last dye-transfer prints done?

[gth]

Ok, I am getting obsessive now, but I want to get this into the thread....


From the Carter Museum site.... would any of his printers still be with us..... New Mexico folks would know?

Starting in 1962 Porter generally employed a printer to make separations, matrices, and prints of the images he selected. He would then mount and spot the prints that met his approval. When under deadline pressure to complete prints for a project, he would also go into the darkroom on weekends to continue the printing. The Santa Fe painter Jorge Fick printed many of Porter's images from 1962 to 1968. David Rathbun printed for Porter from 1971 to 1974. Jim Bones was Porter's printer from late 1974 to 1977. The artist then printed his own work entirely until 1988, when he took on Bob Widdicombe.

Porter generally created only one or two prints of a given image, though a few images are represented in the collection by up to eight prints. He made a point of reprinting images that he sold or gave away. Thus, save for his earliest work, the collection includes examples of more than ninety percent of the images he chose for printing throughout his career.

Gelatin silver prints: 1,847
Dye transfer prints: 7,579
Black-and-white negatives: 4,441
Transparencies: approximately 25,000
Slides: approximately 60,000
Separation negatives: 19,014
Masks: approximately 12,000
Matrices: 7,317
Work prints: 2,683

[bigdog]

I wonder if the museum has the funds to curate this collection properly?

As opposed to who or what? Do you know anything about the Amon Carter or its photography collection?

[Wayne Lambert]

Re former assitants: Jim Bones is back to doing geology. I think he is in west Texas. Alpine?

Re the Amon Carter: I would guess it will take good care of Porter's collection. If you haven't visited it, it's a photographer's delight. They also have Laura Gilpin's materials.

Wayne

[gth]

As opposed to who or what? Do you know anything about the Amon Carter or its photography collection?

No, not a clue!!

It's an honest question given that arts management is often constrained by funds.

Not to be taken as a critic of the museum, on the contrary, I would welcome the good news.

[KJ Smith]

Yes, The Amon Carter is a great museum that has the funds, resources and people to handle his archive.

They do not charge entry fee's, so if you get down that way, stop in.

I am quite sure they would welcome a donation (http://www.cartermuseum.org/support), if you would like to help.

[Drew Wiley]

The books vary considerably in quality. The early ones were made by master technicians working directly from the original transparencies. These were hardbound and had varnished pages (the varnish has yellowed by now on most of these), and this was obviously before the era of scanned separations. The later softbound books were generally far inferior in printing quality as well as hue punch. Among hardcore dye transfer printers, Eliot did not have a reputation as a master of that medium, and his assistants were considered better. But compared to the options of the era, dye transfer was still the premier medium, and Porter recognized how
to match his shots to it. I'm just a beginner in the process, but from an equipment standpoint alone can understand this mild criticism of his technique. His real
place lies in that point in history he worked as both a conservationist and color photographer, which really can't be taken away, no matter how many mimics of
his style have since arisen, and no matter what binge the academics have since taken. Some recent exhibitions of his work have been inkjets scanned from the
original transparencies. Too bad; but I understand why a curator might not want to display the original dye transfers which are already aging, and probably should
not receive any more light exposure. But I sure wouldn't want to view anything other than the real deal.

[bob carnie]

7500 dye transfer prints
1800 silver gelatin prints
80000 transparencies

left behind, He sure has my respect.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - he made contact dyes of many of his images which never got selected for further treatment. Then some of his more popular images were edition printed in
pro dye transfer shops far better equipped than his own darkroom. Some of the people involved are still alive. Then Jim Bones did a lot of his printing later in life.
Just like AA, his nominal style is easy to mimic, but very few people really have the same degree of finesse when it come to the actual poetry of the imagery,
for lack of a better way of explaining it. Over the years he also used some of his red separation negs to make black and white prints. I've seen quite a few of these
images and they have the same Thoreauvian quality to them, are generally understated, and quite lovely. A remarkable career.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - he made contact dyes of many of his images which never got selected for further treatment. Then some of his more popular images were edition printed in
pro dye transfer shops far better equipped than his own darkroom. Some of the people involved are still alive. Then Jim Bones did a lot of his printing later in life.
Just like AA, his nominal style is easy to mimic, but very few people really have the same degree of finesse when it come to the actual poetry of the imagery,
for lack of a better way of explaining it. Over the years he also used some of his red separation negs to make black and white prints. I've seen quite a few of these
images and they have the same Thoreauvian quality to them, are generally understated, and quite lovely. A remarkable career.

[bob carnie]

Interesting that you mention the red separation negative.. when I make BW conversions from colour originals, no matter how they get to me, I look at all three channels and pick one and usually blend the other into it with some blending mode mixture, sometimes I blend with soft light which gives an unique midt one boost.

But what I have found after thousands of conversions is that I prefer the green channel with a bit of the red blended in, sometimes if the blue channel is stellar I will blend in that sucker.


By doing this a lot one finds that the red channel will give a more erriee look (almost infared) which is not what I am trying to get with conversions, I am not familiar with his BW work and if you say its from the red separation, I am going to look for similaritys to my observations of the red channel.

[gth]

Re former assitants: Jim Bones is back to doing geology. I think he is in west Texas. Alpine?

Re the Amon Carter: I would guess it will take good care of Porter's collection. If you haven't visited it, it's a photographer's delight. They also have Laura Gilpin's materials.

Wayne

The ACM does not seem to have a direct link on their regular website to the specific pages about Eliot Porter.

I found this on Google:

http://www.cartermuseum.org/collections/porter/collection.php?sec=comp

Which has all the information about what is in the collection.

Do they have a permanent exhibit for the public from the collection?

It's not clear from their website.

The don't see to have mounted a travelling exhibition of his work since 2003 and that one only went to a few museums.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - apparently he was just taking the Super-XX red separations intended for dye transfer work. In terms of the workflow and specific film involved, I can understand this strategy. It was probably the neg most likely to have the correct gamma for the papers involved, given the old tungsten type bulbs he used to
make his separations in the first place. The blue neg typically came out unduly low in contrast, and had to be compensated for by tweaking the matrix film to
higher contrast itself. Green hard to say, because it's been so long since I've made any sep negs using either Super-XX or official Kodak color sep film. But he probably had a bit of trouble with green too. I currently make all my own sep negs on TMax with one of my very specialized additive light sources; so all three come
out almost perfectly balanced. And you personally have the option to tweak the film curves digitally - not like that covered wagon days that Porter went thru.

[bob carnie]

Yes I am thankful for that.

I spent five years doing complicated photo comp before PS, I do not want to go back to the covered wagon days for all the money in the world. My hands are not as steady for the emulsion lifts. let alone staring through a 1000 of inch ruler to move masks together.



I just wonder if there is a similarity between old red separation negatives, no matter what film they were transferred too .... and that of the red channel that I am currently looking at??

[paulr]

The Amon Carter museum is an excellent instution. The trick (as with most museums) is figuring out what's on view at any given time. Most museums only have wall space for a tiny fraction of their collections. You'd probably only see a lot of Porter's work if they were doing a retrospective.

I don't know The ACM's policies, but they may lend work to other museums for shows.

[paulr]

Sorry- probably being overly subtle. You seemed to acknowledge yourself that there was a separation between the craft oriented traditional photographic community and then the academic based one that caters more to the 'avant-garde'.

Let's not pretend the academic community is an actual community of people and institutions that agree with each other. The photographers I know who teach or study are all into different stuff.

I'm not even sure what's avant garde in photography right now. Most people in the academy would probably be thrilled to see some of it. But that term can't possibly describe much of what's going on. Making work that looks different from the work of a half century ago isn't avant garde, it's just normal.

[Drew Wiley]

Porter got into dye transfer specifically to render bird plumage realistically. But that tranferred over into using the process in a controlled manner. Although DT was
getting to be a standard commercial process for all kinds of things (it was far easier than carbro), some people did use it just for loud punch, much like PS is used to
hypersaturate color nowadays. Porter himself was riduculed for the "candy colors" of his Glen Canyon series. But those kinds of colors actually exist in those places,
as many of us can attest, and his documentation of drowned side canyons is now historically priceless. But it was his sensitivity to the lesser hues and overlooked
things which set him apart. Who else would have made fine art out of splatters of bird guano atop some beige rocks?

[gth]

Bob - he made contact dyes of many of his images which never got selected for further treatment. Then some of his more popular images were edition printed in
pro dye transfer shops far better equipped than his own darkroom. Some of the people involved are still alive. Then Jim Bones did a lot of his printing later in life.
Just like AA, his nominal style is easy to mimic, but very few people really have the same degree of finesse when it come to the actual poetry of the imagery,
for lack of a better way of explaining it. Over the years he also used some of his red separation negs to make black and white prints. I've seen quite a few of these
images and they have the same Thoreauvian quality to them, are generally understated, and quite lovely. A remarkable career.

Drew,
This is probably an insanely stupid question.

Apparently the museum still has his matrix films. After all this time, would they still be useful?
Assuming you had the dyes, could you (possibly) print with them?

/gth

[Drew Wiley]

No... it's not a stupid question, but a very complex one. People have taken old matrices and properly soaked and conditioned them sufficiently to make demonstration
prints. But matrices wear out after repeated use, get contaminants in them, or worst, get placed in dye baths themselves improperly reconstituted which somehow
"poison" the gelatin and spoil some of its properties. I have spent some time researching such things and talking to the old timers of the process just to make sure I
don't somehow repeat some of the same mistakes. It can all be quite complicated, and an old matrice might not ever produce the same quality of print it once did.
Dyes are no problem. I have set of current commercial dyes as well as Kodak dyes and the differences are very subtle. Printing paper is a bigger problem because
you have to mordant your own, just like in the older wash-off relief days, before Kodak mass-produced their own paper. Any of these variable affects the nuances
of the image. And if any of the original separation negs was made on acetate, heaven help you! The only way to get them to register is to scan them and resize
them in PS, then output fresh negs on a registered film recorder (or go to digital printing, which ain't the same thing).

[rdenney]

Coming late to this...

I'm a big fan of Porter. He demonstrates something I can't grasp, which is how to photograph in a thicket and make some sense of it. His thicket photographs are among the few that work when large but not when small. I have a first edition of In Wildness... and the varnished plates are gorgeous without in any way being garish.

I have seen his original prints, oddly, given the discussion in this thread, in the museum at the University of New Mexico. That was probably close to 30 years ago. They made a gigantic impression on me at the time, but I lacked the skill, patience, and resources to attempt dye-transfer work. I'm pleased that those prints are at the Amon Carter museum, which is a premiere institution by any standard. Perhaps they should further protect the originals by scanning them carefully, and producing a book produced to modern standards so that his best work can get out there to balance against the travelogue books which are the most available of his books, and the least interesting. A reissue of In Wildness... made using modern techniques would surely come closer to the originals than does the original. Consider the advances in black-and-white reproduction over that period.

Certainly Porter has been accepted into the canon of great photographers, but I suspect those studying photographic art these days will think of him in appropriately historical terms. That does not mean I cannot aspire to achieve that level of work myself. I play music composed a lot longer ago than that, using an instrument designed when Porter was still a young man.

Rick "no slave to innovation" Denney

[Drew Wiley]

Rick - it is very unlikely we'll ever again see the kind of press quality of those early book. At the time they were very expensive to make, involving a lot of hand
retouching of the plates, which is probably close to a lost art today; and they were expensive to purchase. I have a number of copies, including the famous Glen Canyon edition. A later book which I like quite a bit is Intimate Landscapes, which was reproduced from his actual dye transfer prints rather than original chromes, and conveys that kind of effect. A great many other book, including all the paperbacks, are relatively inexpensive second printings. Porter was conscious to keep his original separation negs because he regarded them as the only permanent representation of his work, realizing that the prints themselves will eventually fade. Kodak dyes will keep fairly well in the dark if the absence of heat and humidity, something a museum like this is capable of. My older brother idolized Porter. But I was still a kid when the first books came out, and I'd sit on the floor with a piece of white cardboard and crop into the published images to recompose them! I've always tended to see things even more tightly than Porter.

[bob carnie]

Drew

In the Dye Transfer Process, one ended up with three or four separation negatives of the original image??

What was the reason for the Matrix film, also when there were colour correction needs how was it done?

Bob

[Drew Wiley]

Normally three printing matrices are used, since the dyes themselves will attain very deep tones, and a K printer is rarely needed. The matrice film is what soaks up
the dyes differentially, which are then sequentially transferred in register by roller onto a mordanted paper. The process is extremely flexible in terms of contrast,
hue, and saturation control, with adjustments being possible at several stages in the process, as long as the original separations are not badly out of whack.
Different practitioners will have very different ways to arrive at the end result. Two of the most active ones are working hybrid to produce the printing matrices.
I don't know exactly who is actually coating the film at the moment - it's one of the ex-Agfa plants in Germany. My own stock came from a late run by Fotokemika
before they closed. It could be technically run at any time someone comes up with the cash. The formula is now public. But once any of the variable change, there's a pretty steep fresh learning curve. That's why dye transfer printers scream at any change in the supply chain - and now everything pretty much has to
be improvised - not difficult in theory, but with the devil in the details. It will be at least two years before I can get seriously involved with it, but I've already
figured out some major tweaks which modernize it from a purely darkroom or "analog" standpoint.

[bigdog]

The Amon Carter museum is an excellent instution. The trick (as with most museums) is figuring out what's on view at any given time. Most museums only have wall space for a tiny fraction of their collections. You'd probably only see a lot of Porter's work if they were doing a retrospective.

Of course, this is true of any museum with an extensive collection. Even before they expanded several years ago, they had one gallery devoted to photography full time. Now they have 3 to 4 times the gallery space, and the photography hanging is proportional. They always have two or three galleries of photography; often with a "selections from the permanent collection" room, and it invariably has at least one Porter.

We're very fortunate here in North Texas. We have the Amon Carter, Brett Weston's archives are 3 hours up the road in Oklahoma City, and Tucson's The Center for Creative Photography (U. of Arizona) is not that far away. We also have some of the oldest photography galleries anywhere, in Dallas. (AfterImage, Sun to Moon and Photographs Do Not Bend) :)

[bob carnie]

Thanks for the clarification on the matrice film.

I now get it (DT) a bit more,
right now I can adjust separations for contrast , density, local colour and local colour changes when I lay down carbon or gum.
For some reason I thought the matrice film was for that purpose, obviously I was wrong.

I have been solarizing hundreds of objects in colour in prep for a winter of colour transfer printing, I am cheating with the colour as the solarizations are of very abstract nature, which allows me the freedom of experimenting without ending with ultimate colour balance. By solarizing the Velvia and Colour Neg film I am finding I am getting into the layers of the film
never available with proper process.

This allows me to cheat for the first year as nobody can point to my prints and say they were the wrong colour density as I have totally butchered the normal pallette.976219762297623


Maybe once I get the process done right I will attempt some Rocks, Trees, Leaves and Water.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - with dye transfer, as long as you're reasonably in the ballpark, you can tweak things during the final transfer using various tricks, but mainly by adjusting the
pH of the dyes. With carbon, the transfer is what you get. With gum, you can build things up gradually. But only dye transfer allows a high degree of fine-tuning
as you proceed. Work sessions can be long. In commercial labs, they'd assign different people to different stages of the process, with the master printer fine-tuning
the final image before an assistant would roll out the entire edition of prints. Nobody does that anymore, but there are two or three operations in the world which
are basically one-man bands doing custom dye printing, and maybe a hundred or so individuals still doing personal work.

[bob carnie]

I have enough on my plate with gum and carbon, I think I will pass on dye transfer. thanks for the details

My friend John Bentley who is a great colour carbon printer was pretty good at dyes so I am told.
I will ask him to show me some compared to his carbons.




Bob - with dye transfer, as long as you're reasonably in the ballpark, you can tweak things during the final transfer using various tricks, but mainly by adjusting the
pH of the dyes. With carbon, the transfer is what you get. With gum, you can build things up gradually. But only dye transfer allows a high degree of fine-tuning
as you proceed. Work sessions can be long. In commercial labs, they'd assign different people to different stages of the process, with the master printer fine-tuning
the final image before an assistant would roll out the entire edition of prints. Nobody does that anymore, but there are two or three operations in the world which
are basically one-man bands doing custom dye printing, and maybe a hundred or so individuals still doing personal work.

[gth]

Normally three printing matrices are used, since the dyes themselves will attain very deep tones, and a K printer is rarely needed. The matrice film is what soaks up
the dyes differentially, which are then sequentially transferred in register by roller onto a mordanted paper. The process is extremely flexible in terms of contrast,
hue, and saturation control, with adjustments being possible at several stages in the process, as long as the original separations are not badly out of whack.
Different practitioners will have very different ways to arrive at the end result. Two of the most active ones are working hybrid to produce the printing matrices.
I don't know exactly who is actually coating the film at the moment - it's one of the ex-Agfa plants in Germany. My own stock came from a late run by Fotokemika
before they closed. It could be technically run at any time someone comes up with the cash. The formula is now public. But once any of the variable change, there's a pretty steep fresh learning curve. That's why dye transfer printers scream at any change in the supply chain - and now everything pretty much has to
be improvised - not difficult in theory, but with the devil in the details. It will be at least two years before I can get seriously involved with it, but I've already
figured out some major tweaks which modernize it from a purely darkroom or "analog" standpoint.

Drew,

Have you heard of this guy?

Jim Browning..... he has built his own coating machine, and has a pdf on his site with recipe for all the materials for Dye-transfer.

Have no clue how real this is.... he advertises dye-transfer prints for $350 each.

This is his site:

http://www.dyetransfer.org

[Drew Wiley]

Yes, Jim Browning deserves a lot of credit for reviving the dye transfer process and has certainly helped me ease into it. He's an electrical engineer who holds patents on the Chromira digital printer and seems to derive much of his current income from big digital display transparencies made with the Chromira. He he the time
and money to set up a large experimental lab and work out the reformulations. He also built a personal high-end registered 8x10 film recorder which uses TMX100
for the color separations. Since his workflow is streamlined and has has a large inventory of material he can do dye transfer rather efficiently. But I suspect most of
this is personal work and not commercial. The problem at the moment is with paper. He preferred fixed-out EMaks paper due to its use of pig gelatin. It seems that
other options, like fixed-out Ilford paper, do not have the same sharpness. Some of us have been experimenting with special mordants like uranyl nitrate to
improve this. Jim uses a basic aluminum mordant. The commercial Kodak paper was double-treated it seems, and included thorium nitrate. I don't obsess over the
subject since dye transfer isn't exactly the sharpest media out there, but it seems to matter a lot to those who remember the heyday of dye transfer, when one
could make a reasonably crisp contact print (though they were never sharp in the sense an 8x10 black and white contact is). He sold his coating machine to
Formulary for experimental carbon tissue work, I believe. They aren't that hard to make if you have some cleanroom space and some bucks; or you can outright
buy small precision coaters. No need, since the matrice film can be commercially revived on demand. The question is, how many people other than a couple of
volume users, will still want it? It is a fun process to work with, but potentially expensive, and certainly labor intensive. But can be done entirely in the darkroom
if you wish, without encountering chemicals much nastier than in ordinary black and white work. It's a very tactile system, though again, certain steps can be
done hybrid if one prefers.

[bob carnie]

I believe that coating machine went to Siegred Remple (may not be correct spelling of the name]. in the south west.
I am going to GEH to see a coating machine as I have interest in reproducing here for my future work.

Yes, Jim Browning deserves a lot of credit for reviving the dye transfer process and has certainly helped me ease into it. He's an electrical engineer who holds patents on the Chromira digital printer and seems to derive much of his current income from big digital display transparencies made with the Chromira. He he the time
and money to set up a large experimental lab and work out the reformulations. He also built a personal high-end registered 8x10 film recorder which uses TMX100
for the color separations. Since his workflow is streamlined and has has a large inventory of material he can do dye transfer rather efficiently. But I suspect most of
this is personal work and not commercial. The problem at the moment is with paper. He preferred fixed-out EMaks paper due to its use of pig gelatin. It seems that
other options, like fixed-out Ilford paper, do not have the same sharpness. Some of us have been experimenting with special mordants like uranyl nitrate to
improve this. Jim uses a basic aluminum mordant. The commercial Kodak paper was double-treated it seems, and included thorium nitrate. I don't obsess over the
subject since dye transfer isn't exactly the sharpest media out there, but it seems to matter a lot to those who remember the heyday of dye transfer, when one
could make a reasonably crisp contact print (though they were never sharp in the sense an 8x10 black and white contact is). He sold his coating machine to
Formulary for experimental carbon tissue work, I believe. They aren't that hard to make if you have some cleanroom space and some bucks; or you can outright
buy small precision coaters. No need, since the matrice film can be commercially revived on demand. The question is, how many people other than a couple of
volume users, will still want it? It is a fun process to work with, but potentially expensive, and certainly labor intensive. But can be done entirely in the darkroom
if you wish, without encountering chemicals much nastier than in ordinary black and white work. It's a very tactile system, though again, certain steps can be
done hybrid if one prefers.

[Drew Wiley]

That's what kinda stopped me in my tracks, Bob ... for the experimental rethink of "carbon" I needed space for something which will precision coat multiple
layers (not the simple coating rod technique of traditional carbon), and simply do not have space for it. Too much stuff in the lab now, and not time for another
big project anyway.. But it's fun to dream about it. There would be no financial incentive.

[bob carnie]

I thought that would get your attention, I am going for this unit , or have one made , in fact tonight I am going to a Indegogo seminar to see how to raise money to defend the darkroom.
I will make the space for this application, I have all the front end equipment at hand, including a monster image setter(lambda} I see the ability to coat professionally all sorts of papers and tissue key to my method of madness.
Who knows maybe, when its up and running you hike with your 8x10 silently across America to the Great White North to make some use of it.

remember the key is to be silent and not talk...please.

That's what kinda stopped me in my tracks, Bob ... for the experimental rethink of "carbon" I needed space for something which will precision coat multiple
layers (not the simple coating rod technique of traditional carbon), and simply do not have space for it. Too much stuff in the lab now, and not time for another
big project anyway.. But it's fun to dream about it. There would be no financial incentive.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob, everything at this stage is "secret"... half of that meaning there will probably be some dead-ends involved. I do have one local resource remarkably experienced
in alt processes, but everything thing he does is proprietary. Just no time. My current business here is going absolutely nuts - and these frequent smart-alec posts
of mine are simply a reset button to keep from getting burned out. Some darkroom time in the evening helps, but I'm under remodeling right now plus trying to crank
out some large print inventory (a running start before officially launching my second career in a couple of year). I work under a zero debt premise, so try to cram
everything into my own current building, and if I do expand it would merely be to put some of the clean operations like matcutting and mounting into the studio
space. One reason I rethought dye transfer was to simplify space. Kodak switched into a fast finicky compaction of developing and tanning the matrices for
assembly line labor efficiency. I actually wanted to slow the process down and made it less touchy, so figured out how to do it in drums via a tweak on the old
wash-off relief technique. The end result seems the same. But as you might have already guessed, I go kinda nuts without a constant challenge, so am always
fiddling with ideas whether they're realistic for me personally or not....

[bob carnie]

There are no secrets Drew.

good luck with your plans, without them who are we.

I am re investing, time, energy, resources and $$$ right now to work on a hybrid process, I plan to make everything open, in fact for $9.99 you too can get the video.

I figure the more people doing it the more the general photographic public wants it, which ultimately makes my offerings more viable.

I have had the benefit of some great teachers along the way, early in my career and lately, notably Sandy King, Ron Reeder, Steve Sherman , Bill Schwab not to mention countless others here and on APUG.
What I like is the openness of these people to explaining how their processes work and little trade secrets that some would withhold. We talk about the Fresson process, how sad it is to think that it would end no longer available with one bad turn of luck,I find that very sad and possibly short sighted.
To think Todd Gangler and John Bentley were the only ones printing carbon and taking the process to the grave with them, that too is sad. I believe now there are many like myself learning everything they can to make these kind of permanent prints.


My path crosses many end processes, requires a in depth knowledge of PS and laser imaging, combining them all and coming up with a combination process that combines the beauty of ink and the permanence of carbon is a goal for me.
Once I have it nailed I would be open to others to show how to do the different multiple hit printing methods. This is a long, long journey for me, each stage requiring different select info from experts.
Building this coating machine is another block in the way but I do not think unsurmountable just costly.
I am running a business to boot which since the crash is a heady thing to say the least, there never seems to be enough money for personal R&D.


I hope you will donate tons of your cash to my effort when I go on indiegogo for $$ support.

Bob

[Drew Wiley]

A good resource for image setter issues would be Charlie Cramer out this way. You probably already know Tod Gangler, who I think uses one. I have several serious
resources for laser expertise, though one indeed is not open to public scrutiny due to the contract nature of his commissions, though he'll work with me at a personal level. With dye transfer, there's a different attitude in general, attempting to disseminate information as freely as possible, so that hopefully another generation will
acquire a taste for it and keep the necessary materials alive. Either that, or one rich person could do it. But I'm not rich. Things are just very complicated right now,
as we and my two or three potential partners are trying to get the marketing concept to gel. The talent and experience is certainly there, and potentially the
financing, but like everything the whole pack of us does, will involve thinking outside the box.

[bob carnie]

Hey you sidestepped the part about donating tons of cash to me.

My Lambda is potentially a monster image setter, buying the one needed for lets say Todd Gangler and Johns application would be my last purchase if I could not get the Lambda negs to work as I think they can for colour carbon.


A good resource for image setter issues would be Charlie Cramer out this way. You probably already know Tod Gangler, who I think uses one. I have several serious
resources for laser expertise, though one indeed is not open to public scrutiny due to the contract nature of his commissions, though he'll work with me at a personal level. With dye transfer, there's a different attitude in general, attempting to disseminate information as freely as possible, so that hopefully another generation will
acquire a taste for it and keep the necessary materials alive. Either that, or one rich person could do it. But I'm not rich. Things are just very complicated right now,
as we and my two or three potential partners are trying to get the marketing concept to gel. The talent and experience is certainly there, and potentially the
financing, but like everything the whole pack of us does, will involve thinking outside the box.

[Drew Wiley]

Too bad, but the crony with the cash was just thru your area. If he can figure out the low-mosquito season, he wants to hike around Newfoundland etc and would
probably like to scope out what you're up to in transit. He's currently out of town climbing, but is in touch. First we need to spend a little time with your alt analogue outfit here. Getting everyone on a similar wavelength takes some time. The person I have in mind is highly creative, but a very high financial batting average is part of his concept of success. He has strong roots in NYC as well as here. Otherwise down to earth, doesn't care to stand out. A couple weeks of unshaven dirt and blisters in the mountains and everyone is equal.

[gth]

Man I LOVE this place.....

I wish the big bucks museums would understand the importance of maintaining legacy technologies. I mean, returning to EP, wouldn't it be neat if his prints were revitalized as new Dye-transfers, instead of trying to make inkjet facsimiles?

The original chromes are there, even the separations. Making a new process through separtion and matrix and printing , now how cool would that be!! Even trying out his old matrix! Such an exhibition could have a unique marketing potential.. It's like cloning dinosaurs!!! I mean who does not like pig gelatine???

AND ABOVE ALL KEEP PRECIOUS KNOWLEDGE ALIVE.

And you know what..... the money is there..... the money IS THERE......so much money spent on bs..... I mean how BIG an inkjet do you really want to spend your donation on????

The other guy is already running off one 3 feet wider than yours.... damn.... Put that up against something as cool as these "alternative" processes.... no contest...

[bob carnie]

gth

The idea for me at least is that PART of my business plan, what's left after 30 odd years of making prints for others is to find worthy photographic projects to work on in permanent colour or
Black and White. I have a few clients that I really still want to print for , some of these projects they are working on are very worthy IMO.
I have my own personal projects and a thriving shop to consider as well. I will in some cases where needed sponsor the up front fees, and time to make these images get to the public.

One of my clients father was a photographer in a mennonite community, he never got his work out, but his son is collecting some 7000 bw negs his father took and processed of that community
and I plan to help the estate bring these images out in gum over pt pd. The images I have seen show a very simple life and community that needs to be shown.
Others have work in Kodachrome that need to be brought out, I think this is a new niche industry, but it only makes sense to me if the prints that are made will indeed stand the test of time.


I do agree it is precious knowledge and its great to be able to talk to other workers on this and other forums about the in's and outs of making these prints.

Bob

[Eric Biggerstaff]

For those of you who have never been to the Amon Carter I can highly recommend it. I grew up in Ft Worth and the museum was across from the church I attended as a child. I remember many Sundays going to it after church as it holds one of the best collections of western art in the world (the only better I have seen is in Oklahoma City) so as a boy growing up in Texas seeing Russell and Remington paintings was always a treat. In college at SMU, I would go back to Ft Worth from Dallas to see shows as the Carter always had something I found more interesting than the shows in Dallas.

It was the Laura Gilpen retrospective "An Enduring Grace" that really got me hooked on photography and the Avedon showing of "The West" was the other, both at the Amon Carter. It has a strong tradition of supporting photography.

Also, the Kimball Art Museum next door is another world class museum.

Ft. Worth maybe a cow town, but it is loaded with oil and cattle money and much of that was spent in support of the arts. It is a great city and well worth the visit if you find yourself in the area.

[Drew Wiley]

I'm a long ways froms Ft Worth, Eric, but did manage to at least purchase a the book version of Enduring Grace, which was beautifully printed. Would have been
even better to see the real prints, but at least I have something.

[bob carnie]

So that is the gallery that hosts Avedon's west work . Amon Carter is now on my bucket list.

For those of you who have never been to the Amon Carter I can highly recommend it. I grew up in Ft Worth and the museum was across from the church I attended as a child. I remember many Sundays going to it after church as it holds one of the best collections of western art in the world (the only better I have seen is in Oklahoma City) so as a boy growing up in Texas seeing Russell and Remington paintings was always a treat. In college at SMU, I would go back to Ft Worth from Dallas to see shows as the Carter always had something I found more interesting than the shows in Dallas.

It was the Laura Gilpen retrospective "An Enduring Grace" that really got me hooked on photography and the Avedon showing of "The West" was the other, both at the Amon Carter. It has a strong tradition of supporting photography.

Also, the Kimball Art Museum next door is another world class museum.

Ft. Worth maybe a cow town, but it is loaded with oil and cattle money and much of that was spent in support of the arts. It is a great city and well worth the visit if you find yourself in the area.

[paulr]

I wish the big bucks museums would understand the importance of maintaining legacy technologies. I mean, returning to EP, wouldn't it be neat if his prints were revitalized as new Dye-transfers, instead of trying to make inkjet facsimiles?

How often does this have anything to do with a museum's mission? They don't generally make prints. They don't don't generally own the copyright to photographic works they collect, so it's not even their business. These decisions usually rest with the artist's estate.

[bob carnie]

I have won commisions to print photographers work and the Museum paid for the printing and framing. Three times in fact, once a ciba show, once a lambda fibre and colour show in conjunction with the Vanity Fair project that has been touring NA , and a solo show of silver gelatin prints .

The bulk of the time its the estates or photographers dime paying but there is exceptions.

[Drew Wiley]

Paul - sometimes the museums do dictate the medium in this respect. For instance, the Victoria and Albert Museum required that all the official portraits of the
extended royal family (that's quite a few people in fact) being printed a particular size using dye transfer. I got to see these prints before they were shipped.

[gth]

As a reference here is a link to QT Loung's blog entry on Eliot Porter books.

Nice review including historical notes on the most important of EP's books.

http://www.terragalleria.com/blog/2012/09/12/eliot-porter-books/

[Wayne Lambert]

I second Eric's comments on the Amon Carter. John Rohrbach, Senior Curator of Photography, is a Strand scholar and knows photography. Great shows.

Like most museums I think for the last few years they have been concentrating on collecting contemporary photography; there's a lot out there and it's somewhat of a shot in the dark as to what will stand the test of time. I don't envy the the curators!

Wayne

[john_6267]

This may be a superficial comment but i always liked the way Porter could capture the range of browns in his landscapes. In a way, those images remind me of a black and white photographer capturing the various shades of grey.

[Drew Wiley]

Some of those browns would be very difficult to print today except in dye transfer, and damn near impossible any other way back in his era.

[jp]

I think the browns would have been a popular color in that era. Might be some combination of the color making the image more pleasing, and the colors building on the popular aesthetic.

[gth]

Some of those browns would be very difficult to print today except in dye transfer, and damn near impossible any other way back in his era.

What would be the reason for that, Drew?

How can the DT process that only uses three inks show more colours than a modern inkjet with gazzillion inks..... I am not challenging you premise, just curious...

Also, probably sounding like a EP fan boy, last weekend I sat down in my living room with my EP book, bright sun coming in through shear curtains. Man those prints came alive!

Even that very dark plate no 30 with the apples in the dark green leaves, it just lit up. So yes, duh.... lighting has a lot to do with it, especially for EP's multihued dark prints.

Seems you need a full spectrum lighting to view them properly.

Natural colours are different from the colours we find in ordinary life it seems to me.

I mean, the colours of TV and Computer screens, advertising, packaging. They are all high impact, narrow band spectra it seems to me.

I remember helping my mother dye yearn using lichen..... the colours were like nothing you normally see today... muted green, yellowish "earthy" colours.

I don't really know what I am talking about... supposedly the area of "gamut" of a printing technology explains all of this.... nothing more to be said.... still I think I have seen natural colours that don't appear in print..... maybe that is a figment of my imagination....

I certainly recognized something is EP's prints....

[Drew Wiley]

I'll try to get back to that question early next week, if I can think of a succinct way to explain it. But at this point in time, dye transfer is still gamut champion.
Never seen an inkjet come close with respect to certain of these subtle neutrals... I'm trying to tame current RA4 materials to desert browns (don't confuse what I'm
attempting to differentiate with the deliberate blocking up of warm hues like Misrach so skillfully employed)... but yeah, I have a pretty good handle on the nature
of the problem... so maybe later...

[john_6267]

Thanks for your contribution to this thread Drew.

Not sure if everyone has access to an Elliot Porter book, but in The West, Plate 68 I think illustrates my previous post. The image is titled "Pool and rocks in hidden passage, Glen Canyon, Utah, August 27, 1961".

[Drew Wiley]

GTH - back to your question... We obviously see everything via only RGB sensation in our eyes, plus light to dark, so in theory if you had only
three ideal CMY direct colmplementary colorants and a way to fully manage them, you could reproduce every hue conceivable. Of course, nothing
is ever that simple in real practice. But the fact that inkjet requires from 8 to a dozen different colorants just demonstrates how imperfect they
are. There are significant design constraints to how these are engineered, because they have to be programmable and automated, and somehow
keep from drying out, and all squeeze thru those tiny inkjets. So to oversimply the story, they have basically adopted the model of industrial
paint colorants and evolved from there. Since dye transfer is a slow methodical hand process, all kinds of controls be can introduced as needed,
and dye can be selectively chosen per project, just like in the old Technicolor movies. But one cannot choose just any dye - it has to be attracted to the mordant in the paper without excessive bleeding, has to be retouchable, and obviously needs to be fairly lightfast. But in its
final commercial rendition, the yellow and magenta dye that Kodak marketed were close to perfect in spectral characteristics. Only the cyan had
issues, at least if you wanted a relatively permanent cyan. An unlike carbon or carbro, rarely is a K black colorant needed. I don't pretend to be
a expect on dye transfer. I've only worked out a very precise regimen for fully analog separation negs and masks, and practiced the chords as
far as actual printing goes, at least till I have some more time on my hands. At the moment, I'm just to involved in taking ordinary chromogenic
printing to a high level of quality. But I can concur that dye transfer is time and cash intensive, and that there are about a hundred things
that can go wrong. But it does seem to be rewarding in a tactile and hue respect, and properly done, does have the most accurate color
gamut for many photographic subjects. Hopefully more people will want to attempt it and keep the process alive for another generation.

[bob carnie]

Drew not to be a sour puss

but I think that the modern colour inkjets have a much wider colour gamut than any colour process preceding it.
There are variations of colour that were just not available with Cibachrome or Dye Coupler technology.{ I have solid colour background in these two processes to make this claim}

I am not an expert in Dye Transfer, far from it , but the D T prints I have seen do not exhibit the wider gamut of current ink printers, actually far from it.

The wider gamut of current inkjet technology may not be everyones cup of tea , and needs to be controlled but certainly a much wider pallette of colours available to the working artist, and I
believe the manufactures like this aspect as each year they will extend the gamut to sell the machines.

[Drew Wiley]

There are inherent technical limitations, Bob. Perhaps your observation is jaded by the fact that a great many dye transfer prints were poorly made or involved
shortcuts. But when someone got good at it, and had appropriate subject matter, that becomes a different story. For the ultimate, they could work with tricolor
black and white negs. I've seen some of these old three-shot 5x7 images remastered onto inkjet, and the results are indeed impressive, but in some ways still not
equal. For one thing, inks aren't truly transparent. The blacks on inkjet are blaaaaaah and blotchy by comparison. But in dye transfer, the highlight are difficult. Even the results I'm personally getting in chromogenic, onto Fuji Supergloss, I feel are far superior to most inkjet color reproduction - but then I'm doing certain things, and have certain equipment a little out of the ordinary. And once you get to a certain point printing quad carbon with the right pigment set, then inkjet will start losing its appeal pretty damn fast. Inkjet just has too many engineering straightjackets to be ideal.... and I'm very suspicious of some of the permanence
claims (though at this stage of the game, many of the inks are probably more UV stable than most dye transfer dyes - but not in the league of true pigments).
The important thing, however, is to master one's medium. And there is obviously also a big distinction between doing something on schedule and within budget for
a commercial application versus the no-holds-barred approach to personal work.

[bob carnie]

Remember tri colour means you are manufacturing a black with colour ,,, whereas in inkjet we have the luxury of all the colours but also and very important multiple black ink possibility.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - My own background (besides photography) is in industrial colorants. It's an analogous situation, with the exception that in inkjet there are even more constraints, because those dispenser nozzles are so tiny. Ciba is a completely different story, because it was quite idiosyncratic, yet produced wonderful results if
you understood what kind of images matched it. I shot for it. You are in the position of having to squeeze other people's work into the best shoe on hand. But it really is the handling of neturals which separates the men from the boys - and that is difficult even from a film standpoint. The question was about EP's handling of
browns. I used to scratch my head and ask how he ever managed all those tones in his print of Upheaval Dome, back before it was incorporated in Canyonlands and way off the beaten path. Ever since the old pre-E6 Agfachromes disappeared, there are certain desert hues I haven't even been able to pick up on film. Just for the hell of it I did take some Ektar shots up on Haleakala last year with a very wide range of browns in the same scene, reminiscent of coloration in Death Valley. I should probably just print these and answer my own question... but these have to wait, while I have bigger fish to fry. Ektar is a very different animal than previous color neg films, and reviewing preliminary scans of these shots does make me hopeful. Of course, I don't actually print digital at all, and just use
scans for quickly editing secondary images. But I've slowly been ramping up this chromogenic printing thing, step by step. Getting commercial-quality work with
color neg materials is a piece of cake - always has been - but now I'm pushing the envelope pretty hard. Each print increases the learning curve. ... but then I'm
spending about a week on each image.

[bob carnie]

The Chromix dude here on this forum would/should/may concur that the colour gamut is larger in some of the current ink machines than the processes that you and I grew up on. In fact it is in some cases a wider gamut in colour that even our best monitors can show.
Some of these colours are only measurable in LAB mode which is the largest colour space that I work in.

I am only addressing this gamut issue, it has been proven time and time again here in my shop that certain colours will not reproduce in C print that do in inkjet, not the other way around.
I believe that dye transfer may be somewhere in between in gamut capabilities.

I prefer C print for certain applications, and ink for others. And like you and others on this thread certainly appreciate a well done dye transfer.
By the way if its taking you a week to get your C prints balanced better, I am coming out west in the fall and would give you a demo if you like.

[Drew Wiley]

Ha that would be a contest, Bob. I can produce a commercial-grade C print in minutes. I have a busy full time job before I even get to a printing session, and deliberately limit my amt of exposure to RA4 chem to avoid sensitization. Then there's the masking, composition, etc. ... and I can guarantee you that these look
unlike any C prints you've ever seen before - though you might have done something reminiscent by scanning chromes and outputting them onto Supergloss. I didn't
"grow up" with this process - I'm doing it now, in ways and with combinations of materials which simply have never been done before. The hues are remarkably clean, and things don't look anything like traditional C prints. But if you ever have the time, you could get a good skinning by certain "all the above" types, who
still covet some way to modernize dye transfer. I know some extremely capable inkjet printers, but still consider it pretty shabby for gamut. Yeah ... I guess if you
dither endlessly and futz around and "paint" rather than print... but for me, it would be a step backwards.

[Drew Wiley]

Bob - with DT the blacks just go on forever. You don't need a K printer of multiple blacks, because you get a true black with just the primary dyes. Black with inkjet
is miserable. That's why you need so many of them, and why some are more glossy than others - ugh! Ctein was complaining about that to me the other day. Now
that his supply of pan matrix film has run out, he has switched over to completely to inkjet (and he is an extremely experienced inkjet printer, even writes all his own
profiles) - and the thing he misses most about dye transfer is the richness of the blacks. Charlie Cramer went from dye transfer to inkjet then to HP dye printers, but
then... well, at least the dyes had depth the inks didn't. Banding was a different issue. Ahh ... you should stick with inkjet for your commercial clients and concentrate on carbon for a personal project. Once you peg that, inkjet will look pretty bland.

[bob carnie]

I am pretty open to all processes, I like them all, for me the main issue for serious work is longevity , I have been pretty open about that here.
I see ink prints every day as well as C prints, I have to say the ink prints are more and more compelling to me , over C prints ... just sayin.

[Drew Wiley]

That's fine, Bob... whatever shoe fits the foot best.... but I am serious when I state that I'm making C-prints which don't look like traditional C-prints. Not only has
the medium itself evolved quite a bit in recent years, but it can benefit many of those refinements which we learned during Ciba and DT printing. Time to dust
off that ole masking punch and frame and have some fun. Longevity is a more difficult topic because most of us won't be around long enough to answer all the
questions. But I learned a long time ago to take mfg marketing jive with a grain of salt. And there's a heck of a lot those accelerated aging tests don't take into
account. But carbon allows you to choose your pigments in this respect, while inkjet inks are inherently complex blends of all kinds of unequal things, and things like dye transfer prints deserve to be kept hoarded in portfolio boxes if you don't want them fading. Humans don't age well either under UV.

[gth]

EP would probably rotate if he knew I was posting an Eggleston related item in "his" thread but since it has now segued into a DT discussion .....

I found this ...

http://ca.phaidon.com/agenda/photography/articles/2012/september/25/william-eggleston-unseen-kodachrome-dye-transfer-process-photos-on-show-for-the-first-time-ever/

And I quote the article:

William Eggleston - unseen Kodachrome dye transfer process photos on show for the first time ever
Pioneering colour photographer's photos on show in California before joining Tate's permanent collection

Never before seen photographs by pioneering colour photographer William Eggleston are to go on show in California before arriving at Tate Modern in 2013.

New Dyes has been printed from the same group of 5,000 Kodachrome slides from which Eggleston’s first exhibition in 1976 at the Museum of Modern Art were taken and have been produced using dye transfer.

End quote...

This was an article from September 2012, so recent.... it implies NEW DTs were printed... true? By whom??

[Otto Seaman]

When Drew prints color, Crayola takes notes....

When Drew prints color, mere rainbows are humiliated....

When Drew prints color, every color is complimentary....

Cross curves straighten themselves out when he enters the room....

Just don't argue with him, Drew already did your job in his past life....

When Drew pees, it isn't yellow, it is GOLD.

[sanking]

Just don't argue with him, Drew already did your job in his past life.


I am not going to argue with Drew since his talents as a color printers are so much greater than mine.

On the other hand, I am not going to argue with Bob Carnie either because he makes color prints for a living and the work that comes out of his shop is off the charts in terms of image quality.

I don't see the point in dye transfer in this day and age. It made sense in the 1940s and 50s because the assembly process offered so much control compared to color carbon. These days I much prefer the look of well-made inkjet color prints on rag papers over dye transfers and C-prints. Great color carbons are in another world IMHO, but before you move in that direction please contact me for a heavy dose of reality in terms of the learning curve. Frankly, making good monochrome carbon prints is quite a challenge, making good color carbon prints is about 100 times as complicated, way beyond my pay grade!

Sandy

[gth]

Each to his own, and I don't think we are arguing here, it's a technical, hopefully creative and informative discussion.

I have certainly learned a lot.

We got into the DT subject because I wondered of EP's DTs could be reborn, even through his old matrixes. The idea was that a well funded Museum could show off dye-transfers in their original glory just like Porter would have liked them.

Now - by happenstance - I discovered that has actually happened with some Eggleston Chromes..... (See above two posts). If true that pretty darn exiting.

All of these older imaging technologies don't have to exist or cease to exist because of the current modern and economically feasible technology. They can and the should stand on their own.... historically and pictorially. And they do.

The amazing thing is that we can get enjoyment (Even make a careers, like Sally Man) of using these technologies that goes back to the 19th century.

It's actually quite remarkable that inkjet technology which is now some 20 years old and has had the benefit of probably some cool billions of $$ in total development cost (ok.... 100 million at least?) has NOT way, way superseded the old chemical print methods. (Other than commercially) Based on efforts and Money spent they should be out of the ball park ahead for fine art printing. Same on the capture end..... FInally a $30,000 camera and $40,000 digital back supersedes my $400 Green Monster???? GREAT!!

So that shows that these older technologies still have legs and still have relevance. I think that is exciting and fun. And does not stand in the way of further refinement of inkjet or "digital" surely to come.... or some other technology we don't even see yet.

So keep on trucking......

Sure like to know if they really printed new Eggleston DTs....???

[bob carnie]

Thanks for the kind word Sandy..


One note for all, I have been mentoring with Sandy on and off for the last 4 years, I consider his work at the highest level and his patience with me has been great. I am approaching the tri color carbon very cautiously.
I will note that I have even gone to the lengths of making my own separation film on a lambda using wet technology and PS.
Also I intend to introduce screens in my film to hold highlight if required.

The biggest factor about what I am doing is I am easing into this very gently with colour fidelity. I have been doing colour solarization for a year now in prep for the printing.
Therefore if I am off color, nobody will know and it will allow me a success rate at the start to build my confidence and allow me to burn through material and get my handle on the process.

Sample Images98427984289842998430


As you can see , I am not taking too much of a chance during these first prints, I like them very much but they certainly give me room to make mistakes and have fun , which in the grand scheme of things is what Photography has been for me. A lifetime of fun .

[Erik Larsen]

Bob, are those tri color carbon?

[bob carnie]

No these are scans from my solarized film, I am going to make separation film here and start printing some of these series on colour carbon.
I am at the stage to start printing early this fall, and I hope to have good final prints by the spring 2014.
It has taken me a few years to pull all this together to get repeatable , predictable results.


film is 4x5 fuji 160 developed in deep tank in 4 up holders , half way through development I flash the film with a controllable light unit I have above the sink.


Bob, are those tri color carbon?

[Erik Larsen]

No these are scans from my solarized film, I am going to make separation film here and start printing some of these series on colour carbon.
I am at the stage to start printing early this fall, and I hope to have good final prints by the spring 2014.
It has taken me a few years to pull all this together to get repeatable , predictable results.


film is 4x5 fuji 160 developed in deep tank in 4 up holders , half way through development I flash the film with a controllable light unit I have above the sink.

Those are certainly unique. I have one of your "rocks" from the exchange that I enjoy very much. Those would make really cool tri color gums also IMO. Color accuracy be damned if you do these in carbon, who's to know or care?
I applaud your efforts.
Regards
Erik

[Drew Wiley]

One must remember that it's not necessarily the alleged techical perfection of these processes which defined a certain body of work, but the idiosyncrasies and
flaws - the "look" on discovered in route. The vernacular charm of Eggleston's early work in dye transfer (commercially printed) doesn't translate well into more
efficient inkjet. Eliot Porter learned what DT could do and manipulated it for his own vision. And I personally learned to what extent one can tame Ciba, and when you
just have to dance with it at its own pace. And in the future, DT is something that I'd only choose for a limited number of images, and for the tactile darkroom fun
of the damn process. Carbon is analogous in this respect; but there is a reason different flavors of ice cream exist. I'm pretty much a media schizophrenic and would
like to work in all kinds of processes, but just don't have the time or space. As it is, I spend more than half my time doing black and white printing, and even right
now am itching to get back to it. But most of the summer I need to commit to color printing to get that kind of inventory built back up, so I have a running start on retirement income. But color carbon... yeah... that does sound soooo tempting.... maybe in another lifetime....

[sanking]

One must remember that it's not necessarily the alleged techical perfection of these processes which defined a certain body of work, but the idiosyncrasies and
flaws - the "look" on discovered in route. .


Good point, Drew. It is the specific image qualities that attract many of us to specific processes.

I am not attracted to carbon printing because it is the most technically perfect process, or the easiest to work. In fact, from a purely technical perspective carbon printing has many flaws that result from the mechanical way the image is developed. But in spite of the technical challenges carbon prints have a highly distinctive look due to the unique relief effect and in my own work I try to take advantage of those unique qualities. At this point in time I can usually see an image on the monitor and understand immediately if it is one that can be enhanced by printing with carbon, as opposed to pt/pd or high quality monochrome pigments like K7 or Eboni. Unfortunately it is not easy to convey this kind of understanding, especially in an era when so many people form their values about photographs not from real objects but from images on a computer monitor.

Sandy

[Drew Wiley]

I'd go nuts if everything was predictable. Part of the joy of printmaking is that you never know exactly what lies around the corner with a given image. I might print
a b&w neg several different ways, and like them all, but in different ways. Or I might home in rather too realistically on a color work print, but inevitably will tweak it
to make it convey something special. Once in awhile I use med res scans of color negs like an old-time contact sheet, just to save me a little time and money planning dodging/burning and possibly masking, or to discern differences between two similar shots... otherwise, it's the experience in route that makes it so enjoyable. Carbon must be wonderfully rewarding in that respect.

[QT Luong]

Porter was held in high regard in art circles during his lifetime, if you consider that he had the first solo show of color photographs both at the MOMA (1943 !) and the Met. Since his death, his reputation seems to have declined considerably. Until last fall, none of his books were in print (see http://www.terragalleria.com/blog/2012/09/12/eliot-porter-books/). Nowadays, you often hear about Eggleston being the first photographic artist working/exhibiting in color, although Porter's done it two decades before. Eggleston, like Porter, benefited from a family trust fund - unlike Porter, he never "worked" for a single day in his life - and was self-taught, so I'd say this wasn't a detrimental factor. The main reason for Porter's decline in reputation is that he photographed the natural world.

[civich]

[QUOTE=QT Luong; The main reason for Porter's decline in reputation is that he photographed the natural world.[/QUOTE]

Now that is an interesting statement! Worthy of a thread all by itself. Sort of a R. Adams v A. Adams discussion. -Chris

[sun of sand]

eliot porter was a master
everyone agrees with that
but most think of him as an old timer who can't compete with todays masters
much like how nobody from earlier eras in any of the major sports could compete with todays athletes

which is true
but todays athletes stole from the earlier ones which means they wouldnt be anywhere without them

but I really like eliot porter
more than any of his contemporaries
some of his photos are pretty average and todays masters are certainly better than these
but eliots best are still as good or better than any modern photographers best

[Bill_1856]

...Eliot's best are still as good or better than any modern photographers best...

Such as? (I can't think of any, except possibly the redbud in Kentucky.)

[sun of sand]

then you just don't like or appreciate him

I can type in eliot porter in yahoo image search and almost all I see are great photos
http://www.yanceyrichardson.com/artists/eliot-porter/

that's just one and not even at the top of my list from the yahoo search I just did


can't say the same for dykinga
or muench
I can pretty much scroll right through eventhough I know there are some nice or even great photos
I think muench is at his best when he more closely resembles porter

[sun of sand]

http://www.yanceyrichardson.com/artists/eliot-porter/index.html?page=3

there is one that's even more obscure

show me something better

[Alan Gales]

I like Eliot Porter......and that is all that matters.

[john_6267]

I think Sun of Sand you are right that Muench, in my opinion, early Muench resembled Porter and I'm guessing was probably influenced by Porter.

At some point however, Muench became sucked in to the competition to produce the most saturated color images technologically possible. I have always liked some of Muench's New England landscapes. Some of these New England images are more "intimate". Dykinga in my opinion, reminds me more of Muench, both share the same emphasis on saturated colors, wide angle lenses and the grand, iconic American landscape.

[ROL]

One must remember that it's not necessarily the alleged techical perfection of these processes which defined a certain body of work, but the idiosyncrasies and
flaws - the "look" on discovered in route.

Something I often must remind my own customer(s) (OK, one) and admirer(s) (OK, none) of.

[Bill Burk]

...and admirer(s) (OK, none) .

At least one

[Drew Wiley]

I certainly pulled off a Peter Lik print this weekend. Talk about an idiosyncratic! The white light focus control to my big enlarger happens to be adjacent to the one
that triggers the calibrated setting, and I apparently hit the wrong one, and the whole 30x40 print came out psychedelic purple, with just a trace of other hues.
I was so disgusted with myself that I decided to make some black and white prints yesterday, just for at least some sense of accomplishment, and to cleanse my
palate of loud color. First thing I'm going to do tonite is attach a little dot of glow tape to the correct button, so I don't make the same mistake again. Or maybe I
should just keep making insanely unrealistic prints and open a gallery on Fisherman's Wharf.

[paulr]

Oddly enough, I just spent a week in Eliot Porter's summer house on an island in Maine. My host was a great friend, one I know as a writer and the granddaughter of the painter Fairfield Porter. I didn't realize Fairfield was Eliot's brother. We stayed in the family house that's been pretty much unchanged for the last 50 years. The island was the subject of Eliot's book "Summer Island." We found ourselves hiking past Eliot's grave. His old darkroom is now one of the bedrooms in the house.

[jp]

Oddly enough, I just spent a week in Eliot Porter's summer house on an island in Maine. My host was a great friend, one I know as a writer and the granddaughter of the painter Fairfield Porter. I didn't realize Fairfield was Eliot's brother. We stayed in the family house that's been pretty much unchanged for the last 50 years. The island was the subject of Eliot's book "Summer Island." We found ourselves hiking past Eliot's grave. His old darkroom is now one of the bedrooms in the house.

Wow. rub it in a bit. I live not 20 miles from there and would very much enjoy a couple days on the island with a camera.

[Bill Burk]

Oddly enough, I just spent a week in Eliot Porter's summer house on an island in Maine. My host was a great friend, one I know as a writer and the granddaughter of the painter Fairfield Porter. I didn't realize Fairfield was Eliot's brother. We stayed in the family house that's been pretty much unchanged for the last 50 years. The island was the subject of Eliot's book "Summer Island." We found ourselves hiking past Eliot's grave. His old darkroom is now one of the bedrooms in the house.

This is a great story! Somehow I feel the week would have been lost on anybody else.

[paulr]

This is a great story! Somehow I feel the week would have been lost on anybody else.

Oh not at all! Just a beautiful place. Coniferous woods, rocky beaches, trails, mussels, clams, lobsters, sea birds up the wazoo, a few family houses, and a hilariously erroded tennis court. Anyone would have a great time, as long as they're ok with minimal utilities and internet. I took just a handful of pictures. Mostly walked and played in the water and hung out cooking and eating.

[gth]

Oddly enough, I just spent a week in Eliot Porter's summer house on an island in Maine. My host was a great friend, one I know as a writer and the granddaughter of the painter Fairfield Porter. I didn't realize Fairfield was Eliot's brother. We stayed in the family house that's been pretty much unchanged for the last 50 years. The island was the subject of Eliot's book "Summer Island." We found ourselves hiking past Eliot's grave. His old darkroom is now one of the bedrooms in the house.

That must have been a great experience!

Any of Eliot's prints in sight?

/gth

[paulr]

Just a poster from the 1970s, and a few of his books (including the one about the island).

Has anyone been to Acadia? Just a short drive from where we were, but there was no time. I'd love to make a trip there someday.

[jp]

Time is what you need at Acadia. It's a big place (as far as islands go). It deserves a few days. Especially nice place to visit in the fall when the bulk of the crowds are gone and the air is dryer/cleaner. I can see Cadillac Mountain (big mountain in the park) from across the bay sometimes (it's a two hour drive from Rockland), but I haven't been there but once every ten years. I should go more often.

[gth]

I found this video on you tube which shows the actual Eliot Porter dye transfer print process from making separations, masks, matrices, mixing dyes and final printing.

In his original lab!!

http://youtu.be/qiRy0hszVRk

I wish there was some safe space to keep these kind of documents, who knows how long on youtube??

Maybe there should be a separate thread for documents and links to advance printing processes on LFF.
I'd be all for more LFF emphasis on printing, classical AND advanced inkjet, in general.

Anyway enjoy the video, I guarantee you will be impressed

[Eric Biggerstaff]

Thanks for posting! I am very impressed as well.

[sun of sand]

i'm watching

Porter is one of my favorites
The other day I went into my favorite thrift store looking for more art books and golf clubs and found the 1984? printing of "In Wildness" and right next to it was the original 1962 first edition
The first edition was given to David from his bride Barbara as a gift on their wedding day 1964

I imagine David didn't want to soil the original anymore and so bought the other

The original has reproductions so much better than the later printing that it's not even funny
glossy kromcote paper lithographs

how good your books reproductions are compared to that I don't know
I have a couple other Porter books and they aren't as good

[Drew Wiley]

Strange things happen. A week ago I had a customer I'd never met before named Eliot Porter. I asked him if he was any way related to the famous photographer.
He said no, but that he had met him once, and had actually watched him make a print.

[sun of sand]

oddly enough i was thinking of this sort of thing last night

I bought some darkroom gear from a man named Paul -or perhaps John- Caponigro


In Buffalo. Odd. I didn't ask if any relation

[NancyP]

I think that Porter had a real impact on the 1960s-1970s environmental movement, not as much as Rachel Carson perhaps, but a LOT of people got drawn into reading about conservation by picking up a book with an image of his on the cover. The Sierra Club used his work for publicity a lot.