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 Westondidn't know what they were doing. They practiced their craft day in and dayout. What they skimped on I don't know. mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mark William RabinerFrom: 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 ArtistsRecognized masters of photography are all over the place with regard totheir 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, wererelatively indifferent to the finer points. This carries over to otherarts, 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 ifits 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 RabinerFrom: 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 ArtistsI was considering the content of previous posts, and think it obviousthat 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 RabinerFrom: 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 printedfull-frame. It just does not work that way. Any one who has spenttime 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. MarcI 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 croptheir paintings. Was it a result of the size of the canvas they couldafford, 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