Minor White at The Getty .

[Michael Clark]

Went to the Getty Museum for there Minor White exhibit , nice prints and a lot of them too.

http://www.getty.edu/museum/exhibitions/

[Doug Howk]

Would love to see the actual prints but the catalogue will have to suffice for me. Its "Minor White: Manifestations of the Spirit" by Paul Martineau. A very good read.

[Harley Goldman]

It is an excellent exhibit. I caught it a few weeks ago.

[chuckcars]

Many thanks. I subscribed to the newsletter.

[Drew Wiley]

I consider Minor White a "must see" for anyone interested in the history of modern silver printing. His style is downright claustrophobic to me it's so intense, but that's a reflection of how well he translated his psyche into the prints themselves. Kinda like Stieglitz on steroids when it comes to "equivalents". Otherwise, a genuine kook as far as I'm concerned, the ultimate high priest of a world that was created in eight official zones of gray, with each zone having some metaphysical
connotation. He even looked like that wacko professor in Back to the Future.

[Darin Boville]

Thanks, Michael, for the post. Not sure if I can make it to the show but I did order the catalogue.

--Darin

[Michael Clark]

You are welcome Darin,I would not have known about the White exhibition had my wife and me not taken my Mom to the Getty, she loves paintings.
Thanks, Michael, for the post. Not sure if I can make it to the show but I did order the catalogue.

--Darin

[Michael Clark]

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

[Andrew Plume]

.................yes

I've always enjoyed MW's work, very very different to that of, say, AA, who MW from memory said that Ansel was "......a good calendar artist......" or something along those lines

thanks for starting this thread Michael

regards, andrew

[Greg Miller]

nice prints and a lot of them too.

By "nice prints", do you mean nice technical execution, nice content, or both?

[ScottPhotoCo]

Hello all,

I made it to the Getty for this exhibit last weekend. What a wonderful place. I make it to the Getty as much as possible. Just for sake of discussion, I wanted to share my thoughts about the Minor White exhibition.

Before I do so I just want to preface it with this, this is just my opinion. I am not a photographic critic, the worlds foremost expert on historic photography or anything else that makes my opinion more valid that anyone else. I am a photography lover, lifelong learner and just extremely passionate about this beautiful art form.

I was underwhelmed.

I was so excited to go to this exhibit and walked through a few times trying to feel the magic of the exalted work of a past "master". I just didn't. In all honesty, it could just be me. My lack of knowledge of what to look for, how to look at it or even perhaps the mood I was in that day. Sigh.

It felt a bit derivative.

In trying to understand his point of view I took into context that he was surrounded by so many well known "greats" of the time. There had to be tremendous pressure to live up to the standard that was set by such greats and then to be entrusted to teach the art/process to others. Not an enviable position in my book.

I by far enjoyed his earliest work the most.

There seemed to be much more of a perspective, a feeling and an identifiable eye in the earlier work than what was created later.

Again, I am not trying to ruffle any feathers here. It's just my opinion at the moment. I would love to learn how other people here view his work and what pushed their buttons so-to-speak. I love this stuff and I want to learn as much as possible. Please feel free to discuss and pick apart my perspective if you like as I always love a good discussion and differing points of view. :)


Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[jp]

My understanding from reading "the moment of seeing" is that he was teaching a great deal in part because AA was not. AA had been brought there to teach, but left on photo adventures when possible and had Gugenheim project work, etc... The school in CA changed rapidly in attendance from year to year based on varying GI needs and the non-photographers higher up in the school.

[Merg Ross]

I consider Minor's best work to be from during the period he taught at CSFA, that being from the mid 1940's into the early 1950's. The school had a large number of talented students in their own right, and quite possibly influenced Minor's work. Teaching can work both ways.

[Michael Clark]

Most of his work I like, but when he gets a little I guess "abstract" ,don't quite know how to take it. But he was one heck of a Photographer and printer.

[Doug Howk]

From the Catalogue (page 4) in discussion on Equivalents as initially postulated by Steiglitz:
"These abstract images, which he called 'equivalents', were not meant to be interpreted literally; rather they were seen to be metaphors for emotional states."
Just as with Abstract Expressionism, how am I to discern the emotional state of an artist from looking at an abstract image? I suspect that it would have been painful to attend one of Minor White's workshops wherein one was expected to deeply read an image.
Despite this caveat, many of Minor's abstract images are "expressive" prints, beautiful merely as images.

[Michael Clark]

I will agree Doug about his abstract or expressive prints as beautiful images they are very nice to view without having a deeper understanding of what his intentions were for the viewer.

Mike

[Kirk Gittings]

From the Catalogue (page 4) in discussion on Equivalents as initially postulated by Steiglitz:
"These abstract images, which he called 'equivalents', were not meant to be interpreted literally; rather they were seen to be metaphors for emotional states."
Just as with Abstract Expressionism, how am I to discern the emotional state of an artist from looking at an abstract image? I suspect that it would have been painful to attend one of Minor White's workshops wherein one was expected to deeply read an image.
Despite this caveat, many of Minor's abstract images are "expressive" prints, beautiful merely as images.

I would give my eye teeth to have been at one of his critiques. You wouldn't have to agree with him to appreciate the personal historic value of just being there. IMHO abstract expressionism (my favorite period in modern art) for the viewer is all about the emotions it engenders in you. Hence there is no guessing game with the artist and there is no wrong response in you. Success is measured by whether it moves you not by how it moves you.

[e]

If you want to know more about where MW was coming from..read Gurdjieff and Ouspensky..
He really was... a very unusual and mystical person..

[Drew Wiley]

I kinda take my cue from what his best known student (Paul Caponigro) reminisced. He said that whenever Minor was lecturing and going off on his endless voodoo
diatribes, "that he just wished he shut up"; but that once he actually got behind a camera, it was a real eye-opener. Reminds of Kandinsky, who was real nut case
too, that is, until he picked up a paintbrush.

[Doug Howk]

quote
IMHO abstract expressionism (my favorite period in modern art) for the viewer is all about the emotions it engenders in you
IMHO, all good art should elicit an emotional response. It can be like a koan or mandela that may even lead to a deeper understanding. Problem with concept of "Equivalents" as expounded by Steiglitz & White is that a visual image is a metaphor for the same emotion the artist had at time of taking (at least that is my understanding of Metaphor). Please gently correct me if I'm wrong ;-)

[Merg Ross]

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

Thanks

[Merg Ross]

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

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

[Kirk Gittings]

That's some great connections with White, Merg.

[Toyon]

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

[Michael Gordon]

were there any of his "Sequences" on display?

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

I thought it was a superb exhibition.

[Michael Gordon]

A review of the exhibition from the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/la-et-cm-knight-minor-white-review-20140802-1-column.html#page=1)...

[Merg Ross]

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

I thought it was a superb exhibition.

Thanks Michael, and for the review link also.

Merg

[David Lindquist]

A review of the exhibition from the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/la-et-cm-knight-minor-white-review-20140802-1-column.html#page=1)...
Thank you very much for this link.
David

[Sal Santamaura]

Like to add the exhibition is well lighted, much better than the A.A. exhibition last month, it is also in a different room than Ansel's.I didn't see Getty Center's Adams exhibition, so can't comment on how it compared to this one. Except to say that if Minor White: Manifestations of the Spirit is "much better lighted," then Adams work must have been in extreme darkness similar to what prompted the "Why do Edward Weston's prints suck?" thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?115377-Why-do-Edward-Weston-prints-suck).

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

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

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

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

[Drew Wiley]

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

[JMB]

I consider Minor's best work to be from during the period he taught at CSFA, that being from the mid 1940's into the early 1950's. The school had a large number of talented students in their own right, and quite possibly influenced Minor's work. Teaching can work both ways.


Adam’s and Weston’s enormous influences upon White are plain from White’s photographs. But aside from confirmation of White’s commitment to the Zone System and various philosophies, I am having trouble finding precise information about his exact methods and materials (other than his occasional and late use, I think, of infrared film). Any thoughts on this?

[Merg Ross]

Adam’s and Weston’s enormous influences upon White are plain from White’s photographs. But aside from confirmation of White’s commitment to the Zone System and various philosophies, I am having trouble finding precise information about his exact methods and materials (other than his occasional and late use, I think, of infrared film). Any thoughts on this?

Adams and Weston were influences, but let us not overlook that of Stieglitz with his concept of "Equivalents", or sequences as Minor preferred. He did use infrared, certainly effective in "Sequence 10/ Rural Cathedrals" that was completed in 1955, coincidentally the same year that Nancy Newhall gave Minor a copy of Evelyn Underhill's "Mysticism".

Although Minor had been photographing for a decade prior to joining Ansel on the faculty at CSFA in 1946, he had never grasped the Zone System. Ansel helped to demystify it, and Minor later emphasized its importance in his teachings.

[JMB]

Thank you. Right. Stieglitz, too.

White's photographs certainly look pyroesque, but I am still digging for details about his precise methods and materials. There seem to be many photographers around who took workshops with White, but none mention his darkroom techniques or materials. With the exception of the Zone System, it seems that White preferred to emphasize philosophy more than technique and materials, yet his control of his materials was masterful.

[Drew Wiley]

I dunno. I look at a couple of those IR prints and they're just ordinary scenes but somehow come across different than the gosh knows how many hundreds of IR prints I've seen by other people, some of whom specialized in IR film. Equivalents indeed. Does remind me of how Steiglitz could take a very ordinary shot of a very
ordinary poplar tree and fill it with pathos. With Minor, things tended to have a sinister feel sometimes. But maybe folks will have to carry their own flashlights into
the gallery to recognize that kind of thing.

[Merg Ross]

Thank you. Right. Stieglitz, too.

White's photographs certainly look pyroesque, but I am still digging for details about his precise methods and materials. There seem to be many photographers around who took workshops with White, but none mention his darkroom techniques or materials. With the exception of the Zone System, it seems that White preferred to emphasize philosophy more than technique and materials, yet his control of his materials was masterful.

It might be difficult to assign a specific technique to Minor. He worked in an era of abundant materials and made the most of them. Certainly a good print starts with a good negative, but there are many paths to that end. Most important is knowing what kind of print you want. Perhaps a study of Paul Caponigro's technique would be a clue as to how Minor worked. Paul used an array of films, papers and chemicals. I recall FG-7 being used for film, but more importantly, Paul knew what he wanted in the print, sometimes combining Dektol with Selectol to achieve a certain look -- simply a case of being a master of the tools and materials.

Brett Weston was an example of this, known for his Pyro negatives and Amidol prints. When he switched to Rodinal and LPD he still made magnificent prints.

[Sal Santamaura]

...maybe folks will have to carry their own flashlights into the gallery...Getty Center had the White exhibition posted "No Photography," but there wasn't any mention of flashlights. Why don't you make a quick trip down and try it out, Drew? I'd like to hear what kind of reaction you get. :)

[Drew Wiley]

Sorry, but I'm pretty much boycotting dim light exhibitions. The bad ole days of cooking things under projector halogens was one extreme. This is another.

[JMB]

It might be difficult to assign a specific technique to Minor. He worked in an era of abundant materials and made the most of them. Certainly a good print starts with a good negative, but there are many paths to that end. Most important is knowing what kind of print you want. Perhaps a study of Paul Caponigro's technique would be a clue as to how Minor worked. Paul used an array of films, papers and chemicals. I recall FG-7 being used for film, but more importantly, Paul knew what he wanted in the print, sometimes combining Dektol with Selectol to achieve a certain look -- simply a case of being a master of the tools and materials.

Brett Weston was an example of this, known for his Pyro negatives and Amidol prints. When he switched to Rodinal and LPD he still made magnificent prints.

Thanks again. I will follow-up yours suggestions.

And yes, right, I am beginning to see in my own work that once I fix a strong impression in my mind of the sort of impact that I want a print to generate I can also begin to massage materials in that direction. I think that your Brett Weston example is good. The very strong lines of his later prints are already apparent in some of Edward Weston's images, and it indeed seems to me that Brett Weston quickly pushed pyro and amidol harder in this direction in his own work and then pursued certain forms even further with the help of the changes that you mention.

The Westons, Paul Caponigro, and Minor White each worked materials (at least to my eye) in a direction that produced a striking relationship between strong form and marvelous tones. Still, it seems to me that form ultimately dominates the best work of each of these photographers. And they helped to raise photography standards to the heavens by selecting and then mastering materials to achieve their ends, as you emphasize.

[Kirk Gittings]

Very sorry I am going to miss that show....

[Wayne Lambert]

Speaking of White's methods and materials--- Ron Wohlauer, a very fine Denver photographer who passed away about 10 years ago, had in his library a notebook or handbook on a workshop White taught in Denver (1950's?). I don't remember how much information it contained on his technique and materials, and as I recall it contained quite a number of critiques of the workshop, but if it could be located it might answer some of your questions.
Wayne

[Jon Shiu]

I have a manuscript called Canons of Camerawork, Minor White 1962. Not sure if it has been published.

Jon

[JMB]

Wayne:

Thank you. I will follow-up on Ron Wohlauer. It looks like his estate may have something. It's also good to learn about Wohlauer. I will let you know, if you don't mind, if it turns out that we need some help identifying the handbook.


John: Thank you, too. Can we work-out something for a copy of the manuscript of Canons of Camerawork? I would be grateful.


It also seems that there are a number of currently working photographers who did some level of study with White. A seminar would be interesting.

[Darin Boville]

Don't forget the recent Aperture book filled with all sorts of things from Minor White's tenure there...

--Darin

[Drew Wiley]

The classic book was "Mirror, Messages, Manifestations", probably a bit collectible itself by now.

[JMB]

Good. Thank you guys. I am digging. Seems White wrote quite a bit -not sure yet how much on methods or materials.

[Merg Ross]

Good. Thank you guys. I am digging. Seems White wrote quite a bit -not sure yet how much on methods or materials.

Depending on your degree of interest in Minor's methods and materials, I would suggest that you research the Minor White Archive at the Princeton University Art Museum.

[Chuck Pere]

Another book that has a lot of information is Peter Bunnell's Minor White: The Eye That Shapes. But I don't think it will have any Tri-X in D76 printed on Oriental processed in Dectol type information. It also has a lot of photographs including some color.

[JMB]

Depending on your degree of interest in Minor's methods and materials, I would suggest that you research the Minor White Archive at the Princeton University Art Museum.


This looks very promising. Apparently, the museum has an extensive archive of negatives and prints, including note cards with printing details. I will be on the East Coast next month, so I think that I will pay a visit and see if it is somehow possible to view the negatives. Apparently, someone started a project of putting at least the note cards on a Minor White archive Web site. I will look further into this, too.

And thank you, Chuck. I will have a look at Bunnell's book.

[Mark Sampson]

Somewhere in my reading about White it was mentioned that in the late 40s-early 50s he used a 4x5 Sinar (Norma?) and a Schneider Symmar lens (the pre-convertible Dagor type). No mention about materials, although the films and papers he used are of course long gone. Not that that matters; if he was alive and working today he would bend the equipment and materials to serve his vision, as he did then.

[JMB]

Thank you Mark.

It looks like Bunnell is indeed a special source of information and insights concerning White and photography.