sounds like 'i wish i was suzan sontag' via pulling wool over the already shut eyes of her assumed readers.... maybe she is a word sculptor trapped in space...
sounds like 'i wish i was suzan sontag' via pulling wool over the already shut eyes of her assumed readers.... maybe she is a word sculptor trapped in space...
Last edited by cosmicexplosion; 23-Oct-2011 at 05:11. Reason: ocd
through a glass darkly...
Photographs by Richard M. Coda
my blog
Primordial: 2010 - Photographs of the Arizona Monsoon
"Speak softly and carry an 8x10"
"I shoot a HYBRID - Arca/Canham 11x14"
Care to support those statements with some cold hard facts? What you propose is just hyperbole.
Collectors paying $5K, $8K, $10K, $15K and beyond for large color prints are not uninformed or any less knowledgeable than those that purchase vintage B&W prints. And small color prints selling for $1200-$2000 are very collectible. We are talking sizes that range from about 5x7 to 10x5 INCHES!
And by the way do have a clear definition of what a vintage print is?
Notice that it's hard to understand what she's saying without first parsing each sentence and then thinking of the simple word or phrase that could have been used in place of the more obscure word or phrase that she actually uses. Which tells you that the essay isn't written for photographers. Its intended audience is faculty members of university art departments, museum curators, editors of art publications, art critics, other writers on art, etc., i.e. the "art establishment."
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
D Bryant, as to what is a vintage print, see A.D.Coleman as to a definition.
As far as sales, existing in the hinterlands rather than NYC does encourage a distorted perspective; but if people are spending $1200 on a 5X7 color digital print, then I need to change technologies.
van Huyck Photography
"Searching for the moral justification for selfishness" JK Galbraith
That's Coleman's definition, I was curious to know what you meant by vintage within the context of your post.D[on] Bryant, as to what is a vintage print, see A.D.Coleman
NYC? Who's talking about New York? And I never specified digital color prints nor meant those exclusively though they could be included in that group.As far as sales, existing in the hinterlands rather than NYC does encourage a distorted perspective; but if people are spending $1200 on a 5X7 color digital print, then I need to change technologies.
My whole point was that the market and by implication collectors don't behave and purchase as you suggested.
Translation - "I'm spouting a load of pretentious rubbish because I really don't know sh!t from Shinola".
A b&w photo relies on composition, lighting, form, and texture. It takes time to learn to use these well, and time to learn to appreciate them. Not to mention the time to learn to print well.
Color can dazzle - just look at the supersaturated heavily processed/photoshopped prints that are selling , while a b&w print that actually posesses artistic merit languishes on the wall.
edit: Just look at the title of the article, "The new color..." what nonsense.
One man's Mede is another man's Persian.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/auratic
That's as far as I went.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
That's aurible spelling!
Bookmarks