Art Sinsabaugh

[Oren Grad]

In the new-Hypergon thread, John Layton asked if anyone remembers Art Sinsabaugh. Yes - I have the "American Horizons" monograph of his work:

https://www.photoeye.com/bookstore/citation.cfm?catalog=ZC392&i

Here are some other links:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170313070635/http://www.iub.edu/~iuam/online_modules/sinsabaugh/a_main.html

https://www.artic.edu/artists/24183/art-sinsabaugh

https://www.howardgreenberg.com/exhibitions/art-sinsabaugh-an-american-perspective

[Richard Wasserman]

I certainly do remember Art Sinsabaugh. I never had the pleasure of meeting him, but did study with Brian Katz who was Mr. Sinsabaugh's assistant when he made many of his Chicago images. I've always found his work fascinating

[Oren Grad]

It's been almost 50 years now... yikes! ...but IIRC I first learned of his work from the Life Library of Photography volume "The Print", where he was featured as one of the "Great Printmakers of Today". I still have that volume on my shelf, too.

[Mark Sampson]

He's not well enough remembered. I'd like to see more of his work.
There is a good portfolio and interview in the book "Landscape: Theory", published by Lustrum Press (Ralph Gibson's imprint), in the early 1980s.
(That book is a treasure, btw.)

[John Layton]

I also have that (c. 1980) edition and its wonderful! Includes a great lineup...(am looking at the cover now) - R. Adams, L. Baltz, H. Callahan, P. Caponigro, Hamish Fulton, W. Garnett, E. Porter, A. Sinsabaugh, G. Tice, and B. Weston.

Half of my photo-related books are (more or less) organized...the other half spread all over and I need to gather them up.

Then there was that really nice Ansel Adams portfolio...which I'd lent to one of my photo students years ago when I also happened to be Dean of that college - and had to flunk that student out. (acted like he was god's gift but never actually did any work - like it was somehow beneath him). Tried to call back that book...but - nope!

[Drew Wiley]

I have that Landscape Theory book. Miserable cheaply-printed reproductions. But interesting anyway. Sinsabaugh had his fifteen minutes of fame. Another Chicago art school type, and curiously, someone who was sometimes seen around town wearing a suit and tie with a huge tripod and 12X20 camera over his shoulder. I've seen a number of his original contact prints. Pretty much standard fare for the era. He worked competently with wide horizontal picket-fence-like compositions, worth studying up close. Now, with so many wide cameras out there, the pioneers tend to get forgotten.

[Richard Wasserman]

Art Institute of Chicago Collection—

https://www.artic.edu/collection?artist_ids=Art%20Sinsabaugh

I think what Drew is calling picket fence compositions was an interesting way for Sinsabaugh to deal with the extremely flat landscape he worked in. He also worked with more conventional formats

[Oren Grad]

I think what Drew is calling picket fence compositions was an interesting way for Sinsabaugh to deal with the extremely flat landscape he worked in. He also worked with more conventional formats

It's interesting to see how different photographers have approached the "flat lands" challenge. Thinking of Illinois in particular, Rhondal McKinney comes to mind:

http://www.rhondalmckinney.com/

The pictures posted on his website are all in the squarish 8x10, though I know he worked a bit with at least 12x20 as well. I think Douglas Busch, the super-large-format guy, also did much of his early work in Illinois.

EDIT: Digging a bit further, I see that Rhondal McKinney also made some composite panoramics out of multiple 8x10's, for the "Farm Families" exhibition at the Art Institute of Chicago:

https://www.artic.edu/exhibitions/7427/farm-families-photographs-by-tom-arndt-archie-lieberman-and-rhondal-mckinney

https://www.howardgreenberg.com/artists/rhondal-mckinney

[John Layton]

Drew I agree that the reproductions are actually pretty (very) lousy...but the text is very compelling.

[Thom Bennett]

As someone who lives and works in a flat landscape (South Louisiana) I admire the way Sinsabaugh approached the flat Midwestern landscape by trimming out the extraneous land and sky and nudges you into appreciating the horizon above all else. I also appreciate that he didn't accept the constraints of the format but utilized just the part of the image he wanted you to experience.

[Mick Fagan]

It's been almost 50 years now... yikes! ...but IIRC I first learned of his work from the Life Library of Photography volume "The Print", where he was featured as one of the "Great Printmakers of Today". I still have that volume on my shelf, too.

I have that volume as well, and while I haven't had my copy for almost 50 years, it isn't that short of it either. Yikes, is right!

Just had another look at the double page spread with gutter bleed picture. Impressive paper printing reproduction for the technology of the day.

[Oren Grad]

Just had another look at the double page spread with gutter bleed picture. Impressive paper printing reproduction for the technology of the day.

The distinctive matte-ink-on-glossy-paper look of the original edition of the Life Library can be polarizing. There's something about it that caught my fancy back then and still does all these years later. But I know photographers who strongly dislike it.

[Mick Fagan]

Oren, I found one of my old screen printing lines per inch transparency checkers, which is a screened line rule unit to ascertain what the screen ruling is on a halftone reproduction.

I'm getting 250 lines per inch as the halftone reproduction ruling, which for the time was right up there. Most four or five colour stuff back then was topping out around 300 lines per inch, which generally speaking is usually able to be finer than straight B&W screen ruling.

I'm not a printer (printing press printing) but I worked in a graphic arts place for 15 years where we used reprographic gallery cameras to screen continuous tone photographs for half tone printing. These books are very interesting in that the paper is a gloss (vale coated maybe?) surface, but the photographic plates are matte. Meaning you can see the pictures in the books without overhead lighting reflecting back at you. I would think it was state of the art printing at the time, and for the cost of these books at the time they were released, quite cheap.

[Chuck Pere]

There was a short film about him: https://www.amazon.com/American-Horizons-Photographs-Art-Sinsabaugh/dp/B001DRF88S

I recall seeing the film at a show he had at the Chicago Art Insitute.

[Merg Ross]

Wow, a blast from the past!

I first heard of Art Sinsabaugh when I was visiting Eastman House in 1959. Upstairs in the print room, a gentleman from Chicago was selecting prints for an exhibition at the Art Institute of Chicago. He introduced himself as Hugh Edwards, recently assuming the position of Curator of Photography there. He raved about the work of Sinsabaugh, learning of him from Aaron Siskind. He met Sinsabaugh in person the following year, the beginning of a long friendship.

Sinsabaugh's work was innovative and best judged in the context of the time. When later visiting Hugh Edwards at the AIC in 1963, I was treated to a large exhibition of Art Sinsabaugh's photographs. It was obvious that Hugh's earlier enthusiasm was well-founded. I too, became a fan.

In the 1960's I participated in several group exhibitions with Sinsabaugh; most notable was "Photography 63/An International Invitational Exhibition" co-sponsored by Eastman House. There is no doubt that the promotion of his work by Hugh Edwards brought Sinsabaugh's work to the attention of a large audience.

As an aside, Hugh Edwards should be remembered as one of the most distinguished Curators of Photography in this country. Three decades after his death, the Art Institute of Chicago paid tribute to: "The Photographer's Curator"

https://www.artic.edu/exhibitions/2757/the-photographer-s-curator-hugh-edwards-at-the-art-institute-of-chicago-1959-1970

[Drew Wiley]

Richard - yeah, you re-interpreted my meaning correctly. By even further cropping into long strips, and taking advantage of blank skies, he effectively turned banal flatland skylines into detailed silhouette patterns the eye could follow and dance atop visually. Nominal subject content wasn't the idea; and that is why it worked. Or at least that is the impression I personally got viewing a number of his actual prints. The aforementioned book itself, not so much. He was competent relative to his own objective, just like his fellow instructor Harry Callahan; but I wouldn't personally call either of them great printmakers per se. I reserve a rather high bar for that. And the whole ethos of the Art Institute of C. seems to have been to get from Point A to B fast and modern (for that era), without undue fuss; the prototype of Legoland, but with Klee as its city plan commissioner.

[h2oman]

Thanks for posting - I'd heard his name, but don't know that I'd ever seen any of his images. I like that style. His work reminds me a little bit of a B&W version of "our own" John Sanderson's railroad landscapes.