Digital BW, The Print

>Ken Carney wrote:

>>If there is one clear message in this thread, it's time for the FTC and Congress to step in and clean this mess up.  As a collector of art, I have a right to know which filter was used, what was placed on Zone III, whether a Windsor brush was used or some cheap imitation, and so on.  Then I can make an informed decision as to whether it's art or not.  Isn't that reasonable?


>Truth in Labeling for Art?

>These are the same people who let phrases light "lite" and "all natural" 
confuse the public!!...  They let millions of  pounds of ConAgra ground 
beef reach the public for nearly two months before they interceded -- 
and in that case public health was at risk! Foods and dietary 
supplements are constantly  mislabeled and government is  virtually 
impotent in addressing it... 

I wouldn't let one slip-up condemn the whole program.  This entire issue came to my attention recently when my uncle, God rest his soul, left me a "Moonrise" printed by AA himself, evidently as an expression of gratitude for some business advice given.  It was beautiful, apparently an unusual size (40 x 50") and I was overwhelmed...until a little research revealed the truth. First of all, I was shocked...shocked!...to find that the bottom part of the negative had been intensified in chromium chemistry.  But that was nothing compared to learning that there were clouds that had been...burned out!  Needless to say, I returned it to the executor.  I believe it is now pinned to the wall at an intake center for the City Rescue Mission.  A simple, but conspicuous, disclosure statement on the print would have saved me much anguish.  It is my humble opinion that we can trust our elected representatives in this matter. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]