Digital BW, The Print

I am reluctant to be pulled into this thread, however I would like to defend
the position of the magazine and the photography dealers at AIPAD that have
not included digital images.

I should start by saying that my defense of the "non-digital" photo world
has nothing to due with my use or enthusiasm for digital processes.

1. There is very little (in comparison) critical and intellectual discourse
about the nature of the digital image.

2. There are very few individuals that have established themselves as
"masters" of the medium - and certainly no one exists that can say that they
have devoted a full artistic career to the use of digital imagery.

3. Camera based images have existed for centuries before the invention of
photography and we must consider that medium practiced by individuals on the
list is as different from photography as photography was from all the images
created using the camera obscura that came before.

4. Photography deserves the right to stand on its own as a distinct medium -
respected for the great difficulty that photographic artists go through to
control a medium with so many limitations. My favorite definition of
photography is that "it is a medium of limitations."

5. Finally we should avoid the trap of comparing (in that we seek approval
of these images in the context with photography) the digital image with the
photograph - I believe there is little of value or potential down that road.

Wendel

At 04:10 PM 2/26/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>This could be a great press vehicle for us. We should
>send this item to PDN news section. Maybe  we should
>protest out on the sidewalk in front of the BW
>offices, wearing nothing but big plastic G4 boxes, and
>we'll throw fixer or hypoclear on the officers when
>they walk by on the way to lunch.
>
>Mark my words, this guy will eat his words. The only
>question is how long it will take. Gentlemen, gather
>your arms. The time is now.
>