Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson 
<jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> Yes, Austin, your images could be improved, by the tweaking of 
>many things. I could go on for quite awhile discussing your 
>harbor scene, there are many improvements that could be 
>made to that image, especially if it is to be a fine art image 
instead of a record shot.
> 
> Jerry

Goodness, I kept telling myself I wasn't going to stick my beak 
into this mess of a nest, but you *had* to go and drag  the "A" 
word into it...

Who in the world defines "art" by the degree of manipulation in a 
print, whether by a trick of the enlarger light or the flick of a 
mouse?  I don't, personally. I also don't waste time trying to 
second-guess a photographer's intent with, "Well, tell ya what I 
would've done..." Either the work grabs me by the short and 
curlies - softly or fiercely - or it doesn't, period. I *do* avow to a 
general boredom with the digital parlor tricks presently en vogue, 
but I've also recoiled at a good deal of the stuff cooked up in the 
darkrooms of many a Jerry Ulesmann-wannabe from years past.

So, for the lack of a better term, I suppose this marks me as 
something of a photo-representationalist, but not strictly so 
("photo-realist" has been claimed by painters, but let's not go 
there). I tend not to hang the "A" word on any of my work, but I'm 
not keen on someone telling me that something of mine doesn't 
even have the potential to be considered art because I didn't do 
the hand-jive under the enlarger lens (or via Photoshop) with 
enough sweat or vigor. I'll side with Austin on this point - with 
some exceptions, if you have to sweat like crazy to get something 
good after the fact, perhaps you should have sweated a bit more 
before it.

Also, perhaps taking a Minor swipe at Ansel: the negative (or 
tranparency) is much more than a mere "score" to me; it's an 
entry in a journal that reminds me of where I've been and what I 
was doing there, and hopefully will remain so for most if not all 
my life. And I'm not crazy about the idea of messing with that too 
much, because I may need all the help I can to remember, many 
years from now. There can sometimes be art in remembrance.

But as much as we argue about What Is Art (when we're not 
huffing about "my format's better than yours"), the important thing 
is whether the thing we're presenting others is the thing we 
*want* to be presenting, something that resonates strongly with 
us first. We need to be comfortable with our chosen medium, 
whatever it is, and work well with it, be we realist, impressionist, 
or something in-between.

G.B. Shaw wrote (and RFK, whose hand I shook as a child in 
1967, immortalized) "Some men see things as they are and ask 
'Why'. I dream things that never were and ask 'Why not?'". I wish 
to move through this world and keep a vivid, lucid (and 
sometimes potentially artisitc) record of my times here.

Your Experiences Will Vary.

 - Barrett