Digital BW, The Print

>
>I found Ken's reference to Gene Smith's photo of Dr. Schweitzer
>interesting, as it brings up a prime example of what many of us have
>been discussing regarding image manipulation, digital printing and can a
>digital print be considered "fine art".

snip


>
>This past summer, a friend of mine attended an international "Visual
>Sociology" conference in Europe. Visual sociology is a combination of
>sociology and elements of documentary photography. It is the "label" I
>give my work when telling someone I am a photographer doesn't satisfy
>them. Anyway, during the conference, a Spanish photographer/sociologist,
>made a presentation on Smith's "Spanish Village" series. This body of
>work was Smith's reaction to the policies of Franco's government. What
>the Spanish photographer did was go back to the village and find those
>people still around who were either photographed by Smith or remembered
>him working there. His research will be coming out as a book, but what
>he found was that Smith "manipulated" many of those images also.

snip

>  In a more famous image,
>"The Wake", he arranged the women around the body in the coffin and
>directed them to where they should look.

Actually, although the room appears to be lit by candle, the 
photograph was exposed by an off-camera flashbulb held by an 
assistant. The wife and daughter of the dead man were looking at him. 
Smith used ferricyanide bleach and spotone to redirect their "gaze" 
towards the camera.

>
>Knowing all this doesn't change my love and respect for his work, but it
>does add to the perspective when we are confronted with the argument
>that "traditional" silver/chemical printing techniques are more "real"
>than anything we are doing digitally and therefore are "fine art". The
>fact is that all forms of photography are "manipulated".

Agreed.


-- 
Bruce C. Kinch
Associate Professor of Photography
The Art Institute of Boston at Lesley University