[rollei_list] Re: [OT] film vs digital

Ah... irony is one of those things that the internet does not convey
well, and it sounds like my ear is not very well tuned today...
perhaps a bit of afternoon coffee will wake me up...

I am interested in hearing from those who decry that institutions such
as museums and galleries are influential in setting monetary values on
works of art... seeing as nothing in this universe has intrinsic
value, i would be fascinated to know of a reasonable alternative...

Relative to giclee, I can convey what I heard from the owners of one
of the prominent local galleries who recently produced a series of
stunning large-scale (as in 8 x 12 feet or more!) prints from Brad
Washburn's original negatives, under the auspices and supervision of
the artist. This is about as appropriate a use of the technology as
one can think of, and one could not create such prints by any other
means. Still, they really did not sell as you might expect... little
perceived value...


Eric Goldstein

--

On 7/24/07, Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Eric, I regret you did not get the irony in my
message, I only meant the issues about art, fine arts,
masterpices, etcetera are very wide.
BTW I agree with you about the real cause for the
price, according some comments in the web it was the
rarity of the print.-

All the best
Carlos


--- Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:

> I think a more plausible explanation is the rarity
> of the print, not
> its artistic merits. There are three major printings
> of that image,
> and some are much more scarce than others. You won't
> get a roomful of
> Adams scholars to agree on which is more
> beautiful...
>
> Eric Goldstein
>
> --
>
> On 7/24/07, Carlos Manuel Freaza
> <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Last October Sotheby's NYC sold a  "Moonrise,
> > Hernandez, New Mexico" rare print by Ansel Adams
> for
> > $609,600, the price for some previous auctions
> about
> > the picture did not reach $100,000.  The price
> > difference happened because for the last auction
> the
> > image composition was improved , the moon got a
> > strange bright and an UFO appeared as rising from
> the
> > distant mountains, suddenly  a subtle mist covered
> the
> > little town adding more grays for the tonal range
> and
> > there was a slight correction for the original
> > exposure, Ansel only resurrected to sign the new
> print
> > and it reached $609,600.
> > Other auction site sold a B&W print about an
> enormous
> > castle made from toothpicks, it was curious the
> fact
> > they could sell the B&W print but they couldn't
> sell
> > the real castle made from toothpicks because there
> was
> > no interest, it seems only the print was
> considered
> > valuable art because the photographer captured the
> > toothpicks tonal variations very well and the
> print
> > texture was impressive thanks to the moderated
> grain;
> > looking the real castle made from toothpicks you
> can
> > see the true masterpiece is the real castle, but
> it
> > looked more impressive in the print due to the
> means
> > used to reproduce the castle.
> > Art, an art masterpiece are terms wide too much to
> > write about them in depth in a mail list dedicated
> to
> > Rollei cameras and chemical photography (at least
> I
> > think it), sometimes there are interpretations
> quick
> > and light too much .
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> > --- Neil Gould <neil@xxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > > Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:00:32 -0400
> > > > From: Michael Eric Berube <pj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > While I'm an unrepentant Capitalist, I find
> that
> > > defining the 'worth'
> > > > of 'art' merely by the price tag is a sad
> effort.
> > > > Sad too is the defining of art by the medium.
> \
> > > >
> > > (rest of excellent commentary snipped for
> brevity)
> > >
> > > Thank you! I completely agree with your
> viewpoint
> > > regarding how images
> > > might achieve the status of art.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Neil
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Rollei List
> > >
> > > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > with 'subscribe'
> > > in the subject field OR by logging into
> > > www.freelists.org
> > >
> > > - Unsubscribe at
> rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > with
> > > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging
> > > into www.freelists.org
> > >
> > > - Online, searchable archives are available at
> > > http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> > ¡SÃ(c) un mejor besador!
> > Compartí todo lo que sabÃ(c)s sobre besos.
> > http://ar.yahoo.com/promos/mejorbesador.html
> > ---
> > Rollei List
> >
> > - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> with 'subscribe'
> > in the subject field OR by logging into
> www.freelists.org
> >
> > - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> with
> > 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging
> into www.freelists.org
> >
> > - Online, searchable archives are available at
> > http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
> >
> >
>
F‰ez"â²Óè²Ûh(r)‰ez)b²×ëyéb²Û((r) (r)nÇ+‰·š¶º%•è¥ŠËkz«ž²×ëyéb²Û((r) "¶ .nÇ+‰·¢žØ^²æãyË_‰é]9 
ò–ˆ
>
Šx"žÚ0à ëyéb²Û((r) '²æìr¸›y«k¢Y^ŠX¬¶·ª¹ë-~·ž–+-²ŠàÂ+aº{.nÇ+‰·¢žØ^²æãyË_‰é]9 ò–ˆ
Šx"žÚ0à ëyéb²Û((r) §–)Þ±æ«r ›•æ«r ¯zÆ«y«ÚŠV›•æ­†Ûiÿü0ÁúÞzX¬¶Ê+ƒö«r ¯zÏë¢Y^ŠX¬



      
____________________________________________________________________________________
¡Sé un mejor ambientalista!
Encontrá consejos para cuidar el lugar donde vivimos.
http://ar.yahoo.com/promos/mejorambientalista.html
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: