Digital BW, The Print

An impression -- for me overly massaged prints (whether in the 
darkroom or computer) give me that same feeling I get when I watch 
highly digitized scenes in a film: I appreciate the pyrotechnics, but 
I have a hard time getting engaged. I find such visual material too 
often going for the big effect, too much idealization, too much 
smoothing out of the rough edges of the raw material that forms the 
starting point -- in painting, Maxfield Parrish has somewhat the same 
effect on me. Of course, I readily admit that this is only my take on 
this stuff, etc.

Chris Hargens


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin" 
<darkroom@i...> wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> 
> > Seriously, I would recommend the Painting in Boston show at the 
DeCordova.
> > Painting certainly runs the gamuts that I described.
> 
> I'm there regularly!
> 
> > The
> > question, I guess,
> > is does photography do the same?
> 
> Exactly.  I already know the answer though ;-)
> 
> > Ever seen the photography of the Surrealists?  How about Cindy 
Sherman?
> > What "reality" does she depict? Or go to the Robert Klein gallery 
for the
> > Arno Minnkinnen (sp) photos.  Sure, they purport to show his body
> > in various
> > landscapes.  But if that's all you see in them, then you can only 
see
> > snapshots.
> 
> I believe there are more than simply "snapshots" and "art"...
> 
> > Every one of them are _at the same time_ abstractions-  a
> > glimmer from his mind that he uses the image from the camera to 
represent.
> 
> I don't even believe they (always) originate from one's mind...but 
are a
> recognition...  That's not to say that some don't have aspects of 
them
> originating from the mind, but every aspect, I don't believe 
possible.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Austin