Digital BW, The Print

Steadman,

> Carolyn please don't take anything I write below "personally" as I am just
> stating an opinion (not of a person) and curious to see the differences of
> opinion and rationale that is out there in cyberspace on this esthetics issue.
> Seriously...and not so seriously...this is intended to spark a little dialogue
> and humour...that is all.

I don't take anything personally anymore... I have teenagers!   <g>.

snip
> is not personal).  Of course I feel the same way when I see a young woman who
> wears her blouse with the lable showing on the back of the neck.  I mean
> really...who needs to show off the label on the back of the neck of the
> garment...who in the esthetics arbiter world had the "fashion sense" to
snip

The labels are actually sewn on the outside of garments now... on purpose,
it's a trendy thing they tell me... ugh.

snip
> simply "hand made paper."  Deckled edges are "cute" and nothing more than the
> edge of the paper as it made it out of the mold or paper making machine.  I
> see nothing inherently beneficial to a deckle.  (now that should get a few
> feathers up).  

Deckle the halls with floating paper...

> In my curmudgeon mode now I also think the "floating" look is so "1980's"
> Reminds me of the ubiquitous "weavings" and "woven paper" art that
> proliferated in the corporate collections and hotel lobbies across America.
> Fits right in there with bright cheap aluminum frames in my opinion.

 still see a lot of plants hanging in macrame! ;-)

snip
> Curmudgeon Viewpoint:  I suppose much of that "multimedia" stuff comes from
> those artists who were the frustrated string-art artists from the 1970s. I

I just had this discussion with a friend... I don't particularily like a lot
of digital art I see, but again, that's a personal opinion.  Frustrated
string-art!  Stubborn maybe Steadman but funny to be sure... Were you taught
string art in high school? I remember it well.

snip
> also suspect the local framing shop just loves to "float" anything they
> get...it means a deeper frame and more "labor" to charge the artist/customer.

Ah, this makes sense.... same goes for the shadow boxes people put three
dimensional objects in to hang on their walls. Expensive...

> Carolyn again (SNIP):
> "with this in mind I ask you... do you think that because most galleries I've
> read about prefer a photograph mounted in a clean white matte this has in
> turn defined what many see as the proper way to hang all photography?"
> 
> Heck yes.  And er...no.  The clean white matte is surely better than a green
> matte.  Unless you have a really nice olive toned ink print to matte (wink).
> The neutral matte is for two good reasons...nothing to compete with or "color"
> (by reflecting light upon)  the image/print for sale, and historically, the
> white rag matte was the safest for archival purposes.  Now things are
> different on one of those points...as the major matte board companies also
> make museum mattes with a variety of colors on the front (visible) surface.
> Despite that, I still pick a natural white museum matte board for most of my
> prints....unless I pick a black linen matte (acid free of  course) that looks
> super for some images.

I prefer a white matte, black is an alternative... sometimes gray... but not
colors. Sorry, what I was so poorly trying to illustrate was that the clean
over matting was the definition not the color of the matte.

Best, Carolyn