report from Chicago

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Paddy, At three o'clock this afternoon I had a nice conversation with a lady by the name of Kathy Rienholt. Kathy is a very nice lady with quite an intellect. She also happens to be a conservator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art In NYC. Before you buy into the idea that museums are aggressively "collecting" inkjet portfolios I suggest you pick up the phone and ask them yourself. Then you can sit back and laugh at these post just like I can. You see what amazed her was the difference ( according to Kirk) there was between how the art world in Chicago viewed processes as opposed to how they at the Met view process. Does the Met exhibit inkjets? Of course they do. Do they collect them? Pick up the phone and ask them.

Now, this is not fair.....you gotta dish the dirt Robert! I for one would love to hear what a real conservator working in a museum has to say. Unlike Kirk, I refrained from posting things I have been told since they are third party communications. It seems you have it from the "horse's mouth" as it were, and I would love to read about it.... :-)

[Paddy Quinn]

isn't photo.net where the wedding photographers hang out?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I know we have at least one here....or so he says.... :-)

[David Luttmann]

Yup Paddy,

Us wedding, portrait, and commercial photographers hang out there, here, and wherever we can obtain the newest information about techniques to not just capture their best moments, but to hand them the best enlargements possible.

Are you suggesting there is something less noble about a paying client for commercial or wedding work than someone selling photos of another nature? I always thought the dollars from both were equally green!

[Will Strain]

Does the MET collect any contemporary photography? Just askin.

[tim atherton]

"Does the MET collect any contemporary photography? Just askin."

that was my thought, but I was suprised to see they actually collect digital colour photography

[David Luttmann]

It appears the MET does refer to the digital color as "Photography." I guess there's another one the die-hards can scratch off their list. Looks like we're running out of galleries and museums that have some kind of problem with non-film capture or digital output.

[tim atherton]

Check out these large Bill Brandt pigment prints

http://www.billbrandt.com/News/Current%20Exhibitions/Press%20release/pressreleasefkg.html

http://tinyurl.com/dyk7p

interesting - are they real or Jorge's posters?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

They are posters, the real photographs have been printed before. These are just big reproductions of the real thing. Sadly he calls them "carbon prints." These are not Carbon prints, not even by the slightest stretch of the imagination.

[paulr]

"Does the MET collect any contemporary photography? Just askin."

Yes, they have a large and important contemporary collection.

http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_of_Art/introduction.asp?dep=19

They are considered by many to be a conservative organization, which is why it's slightly more interesting that they agree with Kirk's observations on what media are considered photographs:

http://www.metmuseum.org/special/photography2001/photo_glos.htm

I haven't wandered through exhibits from their permanent collection in a while, so I can't confirm or deny what Jorge said about their collection practices. I did see plenty of inkjet prints in the permanent collection at MoMA last week. The ones on display were labelled "Digital Pigment Print."