Quote Originally Posted by Chester McCheeserton View Post
Have you seen those iphone billboards? They look pretty good....But kidding sort of. Yes I'd agree that if you want to make a print that size especially if it's landscape picture with sky, or lots of subtle detail then 8x10 negative is still king...I had never seen the 'ibiza' picture it's nice, seems like a return to his early style...does it matter what camera was used if it's a compelling picture? if i had to guess it looks more like digital that's been cropped to 4x5 aspect ratio and grain added, something about the highlights and grain seems too smooth and sharp for film...but I could very well be wrong.

I didn't see those particular Crewdson prints in person but I think the differences have gotten much subtler and that few people care how it originated...I've done some tests of the exact same picture with the a7r3 and 5x7 and I think the digital can more than hold a candle...but of course you're right it will always look a little different. A friend compared it to using a tube amp vs a solid state amp. both have unique qualities.

Yea, I think Crewdson is considered 2nd tier to Jeff Wall, even if they now show at the same gallery. Crewdson has the technical chops but his idea is much indebted to Wall's earlier work, and Crewdson makes kind of a watered down version of what Wall did much earlier and more complexly - Crewdson references Spielberg and American TV angst while Wall is in dialog much more deeply with nuanced and ambitious issues within the history of representation, filmmakers like Fassbinder, and lesser known figures in the history of photo like Wols. The collector's who buy the Crewdsons can't afford the Walls. Crewdson's work looks like illustrations for a really good HBO series, but Wall's best pictures are weirder and have multiple layers of reference.

also many more reputable institutions and critics/historians have backed or written on Wall then Crewdson...but then Wall still shoots film so maybe I'm shooting myself in the foot here...
I completely agree with what you said about Crewdson and his references to Spielberg, David Lynch, American TV, and especially how his work looks like illustrations for a really good HBO series. Wall is much more nuanced... but I'll still always love Crewsdon's "Beneath The Roses."

Also, Wall has an insanely strong grasp with speaking on photographic art theory. Even though Crewdson is the head of Yale's Department of Photography and presumably very smart on the subject, Wall could easily talk circles around Crewdson. Listening and reading Wall is a trip for sure.