[rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex for Artists
- From: "Eric Goldstein" <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:07:27 -0400
Allen -
As you point out, it is well known that many of the "masters" were
marginal or weak relative to the technical aspects of photography;
anyone who has seen many original prints from them would not argue the
point, as the flaws are obvious. Weston's technicals were weak and he
learned his emulsions and papers by wrote. When Kodak dropped or
changed a material he used, he would go on benders because he knew
that he faced months of trial and error learning of new materials, as
he had no technical basis to do this systematically. Among other
things, Adams (who had enormous respect for Weston) used to joke with
him about his inability to use a light meter. I myself have seen
prints of his with obvious aging effects due to bad souping. Stieglitz
was another giant with poor technicals, as a great many of his prints
reveal...
As you say, this does not diminish their talent or status as
photographers, it merely puts the lie to the notion that good
technique is necessary for good artistry.
The same can be said for painting as well. I recently viewed the oil
paintings of a wonderful and highly regarded contemporary artist a few
months ago, and noticed some issues with conservation of these
relatively new works. The conservator at the museum is a friend of
mine, and she confirms that it is common for contemporary artists not
to have sufficient learning of and background with their materials to
create pieces which will endure or in any sense be archival.
Eric Goldstein
--
On 10/10/08, Allen Zak <azak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Either didn't know or didn't care. Atget often used a rising front on his
> camera beyond the image circle so that the top corners on many of his photos
> were vignetted. C-B's negatives were so dense, according to Sid Kaplan, one
> of his printers, that printing from at least one of them took more half an
> hour under the enlarger (said he went out for a sandwich during that
> exposure). Many of Weston's prints were improperly fixed so they faded over
> time. Stuff like that. None of this prevents me from regarding these guys
> as heroes, but not for their technique.
>
> Allen Zak
>
>
> On Oct 10, 2008, at 1:11 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>
>
> > "finer points" means what?
> > It means they didn't really know what they were doing?
> > You wouldn't not want to go down as saying people like Atget and Weston
> > didn't know what they were doing. They practiced their craft day in and
> day
> > out. What they skimped on I don't know.
> >
> >
> >
> > mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Mark William Rabiner
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: Allen Zak <azak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reply-To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 21:59:57 -0400
> > > To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Rolleiflex for Artists
> > >
> > > Recognized masters of photography are all over the place with regard to
> > > their technical abilities. Ansel Adams, Avedon (fill in the blanks)
> > > had solid technique, but other great photographers, like
> > > Cartier-Bresson, Lartigue, Atget, to name three Frenchmen, were
> > > relatively indifferent to the finer points. This carries over to other
> > > arts, including some of the most technically demanding. Modest
> > > Mussorgsky, an amateur composer who continually relied on some of his
> > > more proficient colleagues for technical assistance, produced some of
> > > the world's greatest classical music. Art is in the power of the
> > > impulse, I believe, which if strong enough, overcomes technical
> > > limitations. That, however, is no license to be lazy.
> > >
> > > Allen Zak
> > >
> > > On Oct 7, 2008, at 12:45 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > "Technique" certainly comes well into play regardless of ones media if
> > > > its
> > > > painting, sculpture or whatever else is left.
> > > > As it is in the performing arts.
> > > > I don't believe photography stands alone as an unusual artform which
> > > > is hard
> > > > to categories as art or anything else.
> > > > Lots of people nowadays to learn their art need to make sure they are
> > > > not
> > > > weak on computer skills.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Mark William Rabiner
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > From: Marvin Wallace <Marvin0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reply-To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 10:13:15 +0800
> > > > > To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Rolleisflex for Artists
> > > > >
> > > > > I was considering the content of previous posts, and think it
> obvious
> > > > > that
> > > > > photography at least with film, is not like being an artist,"
> > > > > painter",
> > > > > since the artist can be solely conceptual. The photographer on the
> > > > > other
> > > > > hand must at least be a great technician. He or She is forced to
> > > > > master the
> > > > > technique, whereas the artist can dispense with technique. This
> > > > > mastery of
> > > > > technique is what makes the photographer an artist within the
> > > > > discipline.
> > > > > This high technique lends itself to a quality camera such as the
> > > > > Rolleiflex.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Examples of such photographer technicians are Cartier Bresson, Ansel
> > > > > Adams,
> > > > > Joel Peter Witkin, Andre Serrano, Cindy Sherman and so on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Marvin.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > [mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of Mark Rabiner
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:25 PM
> > > > > To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Marvin Wallace and I Disagree
> > > > >
> > > > > I painted on the smooth side of Masonite as did lots of my friends
> > > > > taking
> > > > > painting in Washington university in the 70's.
> > > > > 4x4 was my format of choice.
> > > > > Feet.
> > > > > An 8x4 cut in half.
> > > > >
> > > > > Was a bit tricky to hitch hike down Big Bend Blvd with but I pulled
> > > > > it off.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Mark William Rabiner
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > From: David Dodge <dannysoar@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Reply-To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 02:28:48 -0400
> > > > > > To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Marvin Wallace and I Disagree
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was brought up by artists. They frequently painted on the rough
> > > > > > side
> > > > > > of Masonite. From time to time they'd crop a half finished
> painting
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > a saw. I remember one large painting that was cropped several
> times
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > wound up very small.
> > > > > > David
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Don Williams wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > At 07:27 PM 9/24/2008, Marc Small wrote, in part:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cropped photos are life. I cannot comprehend the sort of
> > > > > > > > anal-retentive mindset which demands that all pictures be
> printed
> > > > > > > > full-frame. It just does not work that way. Any one who has
> spent
> > > > > > > > time in a dark room has experienced the process of just HOW to
> > > > > > > > crop a
> > > > > > > > decent negative. A lot of poor pictures produce a great
> cropped
> > > > > > > > image.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Marc
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I never knew cropping could be such an emotional subject. I
> never
> > > > > > > think about it, I just do it, both in the camera and later, as
> the
> > > > > > > mood strikes me.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I wonder how all the famous painters of the past decided how to
> crop
> > > > > > > their paintings. Was it a result of the size of the canvas they
> > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > afford, the dimensions of the wall or ceiling they were working
> on,
> > > > > > > the size of frames available (if there were ready-made frames),
> or
> > > > > > > what?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > DAW
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---
> 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
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
---
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
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
