Digital BW, The Print

Alex,

What difference should it make how much time is spent on a work of art? 
Remember, the most important thing with using all these filters and
such.  You have to actually RECOGNIZE  the fact that you have a good
image in front of you. It doesn't matter how long it takes.  I have
images (Color Artistic Abstracts) that were made with maybe a dozen
filters. But you have to know when you have it right, and when to quit.

Many zoos feature gorilla or elephant paintings, and people pay
thousands of dollars for them.  Ever wondered why?  Sometimes the
purchaser isn't even aware that an animal did it.  He or she just liked
the work.

Jer

"B. Alex Pettit Jr." wrote:

> 
> Hello Richard et.al.
> 
> My perspective ( as a non photographer - only sorta wannabe ) is that digital manipulation with contrast and color saturation is 'legal' as that is something quite similar to that accomplished with chemical development. The other 'artsy' manipulations afforded by PhotoShop etc, seem more a work of art of the software developer than the user. I know a guy who downloads tons of image enhancement software - some of the tools are amazing. I think that once the 'digital manipulation' rabbit is out of the hat, individuals wonder how much labor and skill of the author actually was required to create his 'masterpiece' and how much was a 5 second click of the mouse ....
> 
> Best,
> Alex
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Richard Sintchak <richard@c...> wrote:
> >
> > My point is that people (general public) ARE catching on. And it does
> > matter to them. And when they do find out they ARE less impressed. Not
> > more.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >  Richard
> >
> >
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Thursday, September 19, 2002, 9:00:00 AM, Jerry Olson wrote:

JO> Alex,

JO> What difference should it make how much time is spent on a work of art? 
JO> Remember, the most important thing with using all these filters and
JO> such.  You have to actually RECOGNIZE  the fact that you have a good
JO> image in front of you. It doesn't matter how long it takes.  


There was once a time when to run a 4-minute mile was considered
almost an impossibility. When it was finally done it was a very
impressive feat in the world of track and field. And since it has been
done many times over. Now, if someone runs a 4-minute mile, something
once thought perhaps impossible, it is no longer earth-shattering nor
even close to front-page news, even in a sports section.

The analogy may be a stretch but my point is if something does become
easier to do or can be done more quickly it often DOES matter to those
who look at the feat and how impressed or respectful they are of this
feat.

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

What difference should it make how much time is spent on a work of art? 

Lucy, in "Peanuts," once said, "Everyone knows it takes at least 45
minutes to make a work of art!"

surely is taking us longer to kill a lot of it!    anyone ever hear of
freedom of artistic expression?  some of you know this; others just love
the sound of their own voices    but they are getting really tiring    
i'd rather hear about real things, problems, printers, papers, inks,
solutions, and even some feelings if the people can be civil and stop
attacking one another and calling each other idiots     what immaturity
we observe    can we return to the discussion as it helps some of us? 
take the arguments into your personal sites, as it seems you are only
trying to impress us and we are not positively impressed   jno

Thursday, September 19, 2002, 1:27:47 PM, jean wall penland wrote:

jwp> What difference should it make how much time is spent on a work of art? 

jwp> Lucy, in "Peanuts," once said, "Everyone knows it takes at least 45
jwp> minutes to make a work of art!"

jwp> surely is taking us longer to kill a lot of it!    anyone ever hear of
jwp> freedom of artistic expression?  some of you know this; others just love
jwp> the sound of their own voices    but they are getting really tiring    
jwp> i'd rather hear about real things, problems, printers, papers, inks,
jwp> solutions, and even some feelings if the people can be civil and stop
jwp> attacking one another and calling each other idiots     what immaturity
jwp> we observe    can we return to the discussion as it helps some of us? 
jwp> take the arguments into your personal sites, as it seems you are only
jwp> trying to impress us and we are not positively impressed   jno


Interesting.  You're darn sure to get your point of view in before telling
every one else to shut up.

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

Thursday, September 19, 2002, 1:27:47 PM, jean wall penland wrote:

jwp> What difference should it make how much time is spent on a work of art? 

But it does. Art is not always merely the end result and how it
"looks". Often the hard work and craft involved, and the talent of the
process, can be a HUGE part of what makes one piece of art more
treasured and admired than another. Hand-crafted rugs immediately come
to mind. Fine art B&W prints another.

Does anyone else really believe that *all the matters* is what results
in the end?  That's not art, that's production.


Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

didn't intend it that way  (am almost sick with grief over my dying mom
so if i was unkind, i am sorry, i try not ever to be)

i was quoting the first sentence and did not indicate that   but i have
ever loved the lucy comment, for i think a minute or ten hours are of no
consequence   and a grand old cultural attach\ufffd to u.s. from hungary whom
i loved, also painter, once told this feisty painter (moi) when she was
young and was not sure she agreed, "any catalyst, any method that gets
the art"   also he said the art is in the DOING    well    part of it is
(maybe most) in the honor of the getting to do

we ARE an honored lot    i think    i'll bet most of you understand the
awe when we see in front of us something we have done that makes us
quiet to the core

anyway, i do not pretend to be perfect on any plane, so i apologize   jno

Thursday, September 19, 2002, 2:19:52 PM, jean wall penland wrote:

jwp> anyway, i do not pretend to be perfect on any plane, so i apologize   jno


No offense taken, understood.  I know this debate can go on and on.
I'll quiet down now.  And concentrate on the banding I'm all of a
sudden getting when I use the Piezo driver with my Epson 1160!  First, the
Epson driver/Randall prints are better, then I find the Piezo are
better, now I'm back to Epson/Randall!  Well, at least when one seems
poor the other comes through!

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

Links to my galleries:
http://fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=246

I'm doing the same game! First Piezo then Randall, then back again. I put
new cis carts in yesterday which helped, although I've just ordered a new
1160 from Dabs. I hope this works better than the new heads in my current
one!

Julian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Sintchak" <richard@...>
To: "jean wall penland" <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 11:28 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> Thursday, September 19, 2002, 2:19:52 PM, jean wall penland wrote:
>
> jwp> anyway, i do not pretend to be perfect on any plane, so i apologize
jno
>
>
> No offense taken, understood.  I know this debate can go on and on.
> I'll quiet down now.  And concentrate on the banding I'm all of a
> sudden getting when I use the Piezo driver with my Epson 1160!  First, the
> Epson driver/Randall prints are better, then I find the Piezo are
> better, now I'm back to Epson/Randall!  Well, at least when one seems
> poor the other comes through!
>
> Best regards,
>  Richard
>
> mailto:richard@...
>
> Links to my galleries:
> http://fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=246
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

> jwp> What difference should it make how much time is spent on a work of
art?
>
> But it does. Art is not always merely the end result and how it
> "looks". Often the hard work and craft involved, and the talent of the
> process, can be a HUGE part of what makes one piece of art more
> treasured and admired than another. Hand-crafted rugs immediately come
> to mind. Fine art B&W prints another.
>
> Does anyone else really believe that *all the matters* is what results
> in the end?  That's not art, that's production.

Let's not confuse craftsmanship with art. You can't attach value a to work
of art by the sweat equity that it took to produce it.

oh dear, it just occurred to me that when i told the "lucy" story, i
forgot to say that it was a '60's or '70's Schultz (Schulz?) "Peanuts"
cartoon!  i assumed everyone would KNOW it was a joke!   that's what it
is like to get older!   i mean, making fun of seriousness     i may be
older, but i can still laugh at myself!   i suppose i hope some of the
others learn to do that, too    ( i have had some big international
foundation grants, but i am still just someone looking for the way :-) 
!!!)   and i love to PLAY, which is what i call what some call WORK!   
my 2 cents      jwp/jno/jeanneaux     (actually i only apologize that
you didn't understand! :-) ! )

All that matters in art is the end result. If someone practices a saxophone
for 10,000 hours nobody cares or thinks about it . What they hear at the
performance is the only thing that's important. When a piece of art is
presented the question of how many hours it took to create it has no
relevance. I've known artists who can capture a scene with a few strokes and
photographers who hit on almost every shot they take. Nobody has yet been
able to explain the creative instincts and time or sweat is not necessarily
the only or most important ingredient. There is passion, discipline, ability
to communicate, etc. involved. Production is a formula approach and is a
business term. A hand crafted rug can be a fine example of craft or a work
of art. There is a difference and the time spent is probably not the
criteria. Talent has something to do with it. Van Gogh painted fast, Seurat
took a year. So what? Bird was stoned most of the time and made fantastic
music. Clifford Brown was straight and made fantastic music. Pollack was
drunk most of the time and was an influence. The end result is what is
treasured and remembered. My rant is over.
Barry Schaffer------I know there are other Barry's on the site and I don't
want them to get in trouble for my opinions. jean wall penland speaks truth!
I did own an art gallery and saw a lot of crap try to be hung. No way Jose.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Sintchak" <richard@...>
To: "jean wall penland" <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 5:11 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> Thursday, September 19, 2002, 1:27:47 PM, jean wall penland wrote:
>
> jwp> What difference should it make how much time is spent on a work of
art?
>
> But it does. Art is not always merely the end result and how it
> "looks". Often the hard work and craft involved, and the talent of the
> process, can be a HUGE part of what makes one piece of art more
> treasured and admired than another. Hand-crafted rugs immediately come
> to mind. Fine art B&W prints another.
>
> Does anyone else really believe that *all the matters* is what results
> in the end?  That's not art, that's production.
>
>
> Best regards,
>  Richard
>
> mailto:richard@...
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

my last two cents, I promise ;)

The difference : how many wish to attentively listen a performance of digital saxaphone whereby a most perfectly executed song 'created' by the software programmer is rendered at the push of the 'operators' sax button ?  

That is the difference I think many feel with regards to digital imaging: a sort of  "if I could afford the software he has, I could do the same thing "  The impression I believe, is that the Software eliminates the requirement for photographic skill and creativity. 

Best to all,
Alex

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "bgs" <bgs@b...> wrote:
> All that matters in art is the end result. If someone practices a saxophone  for 10,000 hours nobody cares or thinks about it . What they hear at the  performance is the only thing that's important. 
> >

>>> The difference : how many wish to attentively listen a performance
of digital saxaphone whereby a most perfectly executed song 'created' by
the software programmer is rendered at the push of the 'operators' sax
button ?  

What if the software programmer is the one executing the performance? 

Sorry. I couldn't resist... :>

g

B. Alex Pettit Jr. wrote:

 >my last two cents, I promise ;)
 >
 >The difference : how many wish to attentively listen a performance of 
digital saxaphone whereby a most perfectly executed song 'created' by 
the software programmer is rendered at the push of the 'operators' sax 
button ?
 >
 >That is the difference I think many feel with regards to digital 
imaging: a sort of  "if I could afford the software he has, I could do 
the same thing "  The impression I believe, is that the Software 
eliminates the requirement for photographic skill and creativity.
 >
 >
 >
 >
The analogy is essentially flawed...

In your analogy, you argue that the musician equates to a photographer..
  Unfortunately, given your analogy, the photographer would more
reasonably equate to a sound engineer (especially in the "World
according to Austin") recording a Sax performance...  A photographer
captures or creates imagery from pre-existing visual constructs...  The
output of the photographer is NOT simply visual information that a
viewer sees once, like a live performance of the sax is heard as it is
played..  Instead, a photo would equate to a CD, tape, or vinyl album..

So, using the more accurate analogy.. Yes, there are those who hate
cds's and prefer the "warm" sound of vinyl..  However, CDs are
inherently more complete reproducers of the audible portion of the
actual  sound spectrum that was created during the performance..
  Viewers/listeners may prefer a  live performance (akin to a "realistic"
landscape)  or an in studio experimental CD of performance art (akin to
more "abstract" photos)... However, I rarely hear people saying -  "I
won't buy a CD, it's just too easy for the sound engineer to reproduce
perfect  sound...."

In fact, if we examine that analogy more closely, we would note that the
recorded sound is (in the VAST majority of cases) highly tweaked by the
sound engineer to create either the most satisfying musical experience
OR to most faithfully recreate on a stereo the illusion of the sound, as
heard by a listener, being fully faithful to the performance.  In that
latter case, the actual studio software and mixing is done DIGITALLY and
would closely approximate a Photog using Photoshop to tweak an image to
faithful reproduction...  Moreso, that sound is  recorded first, and
then tweaked more substantially as it is mixed and laid down onto later
tracks.,..  Hmmmm..  Sounds a lot like tweaking a saved digital image in
PShop..

OK, now that we have the analogy down...   Although there ARE purists
who prefer "bootlegs" that are untweaked and simply output directly to
vinyl (ultra-purists - I wonder if Austin "prefers" these?) or CD...
Those listeners are few and far between..  Consumers, even in art,
generally want the highest quality they can afford..  "Quality" includes
judgments of the artist's skill, quality of the reproduction, likely
life of the repro..  etc...

That's why we often find ourselves in discussions of wedges, curves,
inksets, papers, and archival quality... To increase the perceived value
of our items...

Keith

Sorry to disagree with you. A CD does not produce a more complete
reproduction of live sound.It produces an engineers interpretation of the
sound and the engineer usually doesn't know a thing about music.There are
harmonics lost in digital reproductions. Most people have never heard live
sound even at concerts. It goes through mikes, speakers, and then the
particular acoustics of the joint the music is played in. The common grumble
is the sound system sucks. Actually music is generally considered the most
abstract of the arts. Didn't mean to get into a music discussion. My only
point is that you hear (some people even listen, too) music and you look at
or see visual media. What you see or hear becomes a personal experience and
the producers of the art aren't ever sure of what another person sees or
hears. I don't care how the creator got there (usually), but I do care about
the creation.

I don't know what a faithful reproduction is. If you are saying that a
photographer is faithfully reproducing a scene then where is the imagination
or the personal interpretation that makes one artist different from another
if all everyone does is reproduce faithfully.

I'm sorry I got into this. I think the equipment becomes more important than
the purpose it's supposed to be used for. My apologies, folks. I hate to
send this.

Barry S.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


>
> B. Alex Pettit Jr. wrote:
>
>  >my last two cents, I promise ;)
>  >
>  >The difference : how many wish to attentively listen a performance of
> digital saxaphone whereby a most perfectly executed song 'created' by
> the software programmer is rendered at the push of the 'operators' sax
> button ?
>  >
>  >That is the difference I think many feel with regards to digital
> imaging: a sort of  "if I could afford the software he has, I could do
> the same thing "  The impression I believe, is that the Software
> eliminates the requirement for photographic skill and creativity.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
> The analogy is essentially flawed...
>
> In your analogy, you argue that the musician equates to a photographer..
>   Unfortunately, given your analogy, the photographer would more
> reasonably equate to a sound engineer (especially in the "World
> according to Austin") recording a Sax performance...  A photographer
> captures or creates imagery from pre-existing visual constructs...  The
> output of the photographer is NOT simply visual information that a
> viewer sees once, like a live performance of the sax is heard as it is
> played..  Instead, a photo would equate to a CD, tape, or vinyl album..
>
> So, using the more accurate analogy.. Yes, there are those who hate
> cds's and prefer the "warm" sound of vinyl..  However, CDs are
> inherently more complete reproducers of the audible portion of the
> actual  sound spectrum that was created during the performance..
>   Viewers/listeners may prefer a  live performance (akin to a "realistic"
> landscape)  or an in studio experimental CD of performance art (akin to
> more "abstract" photos)... However, I rarely hear people saying -  "I
> won't buy a CD, it's just too easy for the sound engineer to reproduce
> perfect  sound...."
>
> In fact, if we examine that analogy more closely, we would note that the
> recorded sound is (in the VAST majority of cases) highly tweaked by the
> sound engineer to create either the most satisfying musical experience
> OR to most faithfully recreate on a stereo the illusion of the sound, as
> heard by a listener, being fully faithful to the performance.  In that
> latter case, the actual studio software and mixing is done DIGITALLY and
> would closely approximate a Photog using Photoshop to tweak an image to
> faithful reproduction...  Moreso, that sound is  recorded first, and
> then tweaked more substantially as it is mixed and laid down onto later
> tracks.,..  Hmmmm..  Sounds a lot like tweaking a saved digital image in
> PShop..
>
> OK, now that we have the analogy down...   Although there ARE purists
> who prefer "bootlegs" that are untweaked and simply output directly to
> vinyl (ultra-purists - I wonder if Austin "prefers" these?) or CD...
> Those listeners are few and far between..  Consumers, even in art,
> generally want the highest quality they can afford..  "Quality" includes
> judgments of the artist's skill, quality of the reproduction, likely
> life of the repro..  etc...
>
> That's why we often find ourselves in discussions of wedges, curves,
> inksets, papers, and archival quality... To increase the perceived value
> of our items...
>
> Keith
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

The software programmer should then be executed. Sorry, I couldn't resist!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gus J Grubba" <gus@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 5:09 AM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


>
>
> >>> The difference : how many wish to attentively listen a performance
> of digital saxaphone whereby a most perfectly executed song 'created' by
> the software programmer is rendered at the push of the 'operators' sax
> button ?
>
> What if the software programmer is the one executing the performance?
>
> Sorry. I couldn't resist... :>
>
> g
>
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Photography is a great pleasure in my life and that is what this forum caters 
to. Audio is also great fun but is work as it has been a major part of my 
career. So I'd really like to see folks stay away from the vinyl disc Vs CD 
analogies. They don't hold up.

Without getting into personal credentials, I can state for a fact that the 
current CD standards were known at the time of their creation to NOT cover 
the audio spectrum as capably as professional analog technologies of the 
time. It's more than an issue of "warmth." The success of CDs has been the 
result of good old fashion marketing and industrial competition - not 
fidelity - the same was true in the early transition of cylinder records to 
flat discs. CD's didn't scratch as easily, were smaller and more convenient 
and powerful labels were able to get important artists to produce in this new 
format. 

What this has to do with photography from my perspective is that it too is a 
field with many myths and diverse thoughts. Isn't that great! Creativity!

Bill


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

Bravo, Bill

bgs
----- Original Message -----
From: <sstormb@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> Photography is a great pleasure in my life and that is what this forum
caters
> to. Audio is also great fun but is work as it has been a major part of my
> career. So I'd really like to see folks stay away from the vinyl disc Vs
CD
> analogies. They don't hold up.
>
> Without getting into personal credentials, I can state for a fact that the
> current CD standards were known at the time of their creation to NOT cover
> the audio spectrum as capably as professional analog technologies of the
> time. It's more than an issue of "warmth." The success of CDs has been the
> result of good old fashion marketing and industrial competition - not
> fidelity - the same was true in the early transition of cylinder records
to
> flat discs. CD's didn't scratch as easily, were smaller and more
convenient
> and powerful labels were able to get important artists to produce in this
new
> format.
>
> What this has to do with photography from my perspective is that it too is
a
> field with many myths and diverse thoughts. Isn't that great! Creativity!
>
> Bill
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Hi Bill,

> I can state for a fact
> that the
> current CD standards were known at the time of their creation to
> NOT cover
> the audio spectrum as capably as professional analog technologies of the
> time.

I'd argue that the current CD standard does, in fact, cover the "audio"
spectrum, but that simply covering the "audio" spectrum is insufficient.
It's clear that digital audio has a higher SNR than any "normal" analog
medium, but that doesn't mean digital is necessarily better...or has higher
"fidelity", per se.  It's just like people who like digital imaging because
they see clean images with crisp edges...but the resolution is lacking in
digital images, compared to film images.  It's all in what you like in an
image/audio.  I do believe there are nth order signal issues with the
current CD standard, that are audibly "visible" on analog recordings.

I have designed quite a bit of digital audio gear, so I have some digital
audio files that were sampled from my equipment at 18 bits at 192KHz (no,
not  Sigma/Delta, but REAL 192KHz), and they do sound simply amazing.  They
take up a LOT of disk space though...but the fidelity is, in my opinion, far
better than any analog medium I've ever experienced.

The deal with CDs, as well as digital cameras, is that MOST people are
really happy with them...and that's what's going to drive the market, IMO.

Regards,

Austin

Barry,

> Sorry to disagree with you. A CD does not produce a more complete
> reproduction of live sound.It produces an engineers interpretation of the
> sound and the engineer usually doesn't know a thing about music.

Why do you say that?  Most of the digital audio engineers I know are VERY
into music, in fact, and know quite a bit about it.  And, why would that be
any different than analog audio engineers?  I'd even say that digital audio
engineers can be more into music than most anyone, as I've had to understand
quite a lot about the actual signal that's produced in order to design the
electronics, and write the DSP code to process it.  It was far more
difficult and required far more understanding than any analog audio design I
ever did, not that I really did much analog audio design, except for input
and output stages.

> There are
> harmonics lost in digital reproductions.

Absolutely correct, but that takes more than a recording to reproduce such
subtlety that it actually effects the audibility of the music, as well as
environmental conditions.  Also, it usually takes a trained ear to even hear
the difference.

Regards,

Austin

Austin,

I admit that I am a little guilty of attacking the sound guys musicality or
lack of same but they certainly are capable of changing the original intent
of the musician. Yes, I can hear the difference because my ear is trained.
The timbre of an instrument has a lot to do with the harmonics as does
subtle toning of a print make the difference between photographers. I won't
say who my favorite photographers are but I will say that they are not
necessarily the ones who take the sharpest pictures. This is the usual knock
about Wynton Marsalis. He plays clean and accurately but cold.

I've been playing music for about 50+ years and photographing for about the
same length of time. I like PS a lot and will never go back to a darkroom.
When I'm not lazy and have the juices flowing I can really get in a zone
with a photo or a saxophone. It's a strange feeling.

My apologies if I offended you----some of my best friend have recording
studios.

Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> Barry,
>
> > Sorry to disagree with you. A CD does not produce a more complete
> > reproduction of live sound.It produces an engineers interpretation of
the
> > sound and the engineer usually doesn't know a thing about music.
>
> Why do you say that?  Most of the digital audio engineers I know are VERY
> into music, in fact, and know quite a bit about it.  And, why would that
be
> any different than analog audio engineers?  I'd even say that digital
audio
> engineers can be more into music than most anyone, as I've had to
understand
> quite a lot about the actual signal that's produced in order to design the
> electronics, and write the DSP code to process it.  It was far more
> difficult and required far more understanding than any analog audio design
I
> ever did, not that I really did much analog audio design, except for input
> and output stages.
>
> > There are
> > harmonics lost in digital reproductions.
>
> Absolutely correct, but that takes more than a recording to reproduce such
> subtlety that it actually effects the audibility of the music, as well as
> environmental conditions.  Also, it usually takes a trained ear to even
hear
> the difference.
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Hi Barry,

> This is the
> usual knock
> about Wynton Marsalis. He plays clean and accurately but cold.

I'm not a big fan of "Baby Face", but of his board work.  Listen to some of
the things he's produced, and you'll see what I mean.

> My apologies if I offended you----some of my best friend have recording
> studios.

No, no offense taken at all!  In fact, I liked the mental diversion of the
discussion topic ;-)

Regards,

Austin

You guys crack me up. You just enjoy the debate. Please remember the original 
comparison was with regard to CD standards, not digital audio recording. The 
latter is far better today that when the CD standard was set. Unfortunately 
you are still listening to commercial CDs not optimal digital audio 
recordings that would be great if only a commercial CD were up to it. 

So getting back to photography try this one. Take a 4x5 negative and send it 
over the WEB reformatted as a GIF file = today's digital audio capabilities 
but made available on a CD.

Also be wary of the golden ears arguments. They have been around for ever - 
mainly because they are so self-aggrandizing, impossible to validate and 
dumb. The world's most prestigious audio society actually tried to establish 
a standards committee to deal with that issue. Guess what - no one could 
agree on any objective way to deal with it. Bias is well and thriving.

Bill


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

What's a golden ears argument and what is the word's most prestigious audio
society? There must be a golden eyes argument also I would think to get back
to photography.       bgs
----- Original Message -----
From: <sstormb@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> You guys crack me up. You just enjoy the debate. Please remember the
original
> comparison was with regard to CD standards, not digital audio recording.
The
> latter is far better today that when the CD standard was set.
Unfortunately
> you are still listening to commercial CDs not optimal digital audio
> recordings that would be great if only a commercial CD were up to it.
>
> So getting back to photography try this one. Take a 4x5 negative and send
it
> over the WEB reformatted as a GIF file = today's digital audio
capabilities
> but made available on a CD.
>
> Also be wary of the golden ears arguments. They have been around for
ever -
> mainly because they are so self-aggrandizing, impossible to validate and
> dumb. The world's most prestigious audio society actually tried to
establish
> a standards committee to deal with that issue. Guess what - no one could
> agree on any objective way to deal with it. Bias is well and thriving.
>
> Bill
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Ready to dive into a new printer...

There seems to be a divergence of opinion I noticed about papers that 
work well with the new Epson Printers and UltraChrome inks.

Seems I remember seeing someone...or maybe more than one post 
saying... that Photo Rag...my favorite paper... did not fare well 
with these inks.

Could someone enlighten me on this?
-- 

bill agee studio
capistrano beach, ca / laguna beach, ca

http://www.redsilver.com

Yes, I can enlighten.   Ultrachrome works brilliantly on PhotoRag. 

Quentin 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Bill Agee <billagee@r...> 
wrote:
> Ready to dive into a new printer...
> 
> There seems to be a divergence of opinion I noticed about papers 
that 

> work well with the new Epson Printers and UltraChrome inks.
> 
> Seems I remember seeing someone...or maybe more than one post 
> saying... that Photo Rag...my favorite paper... did not fare well 
> with these inks.
> 
> Could someone enlighten me on this?
> -- 
> 
> bill agee studio
> capistrano beach, ca / laguna beach, ca
> 
> http://www.redsilver.com

Golden ears argument: my opinion of what is the best audio is the ultimate 
yardstick, including better than your opinion.  (love the last part)  
substitute picture and I guess you can have the golden eye argument, but I 
think James Bond has that already claimed. I have been in listening tests 
with some golden ear folks. It gets funny pretty fast. You don't have to 
worry about having a thought on the matter, it will be provided.

The Audio Engineering Society is an excellent professional organization. This 
international body sets most of the standards within the audio area. Lots of 
differing thinking but also a great forum for exchange of good ideas.

Bill




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

On 9/20/02 12:43 PM, "Bill Agee" <billagee@...> wrote:

> Ready to dive into a new printer...
> 
> There seems to be a divergence of opinion I noticed about papers that
> work well with the new Epson Printers and UltraChrome inks.
> 
> Seems I remember seeing someone...or maybe more than one post
> saying... that Photo Rag...my favorite paper... did not fare well
> with these inks.
> 
> Could someone enlighten me on this?

Antonis found that photorag only got a 1.63 dmax with the ultrachromes using
the epson driver...incomparison to a 1.73 dmax for EAM.  Traditionally there
was the opposite pattern with photorag performing better.  1.63 is less
black than MIS FS inks get with photorag (around 1.7).  The big mystery at
this point is how somerset enhanced (or the new epson somerset velvet)
performs...this may be the best hope for a good rag paper with the
ultrachromes.

Robert

ok. We still have to get into the golden nose argument. Don't laugh. I used
to deal with perfumers. They are referred to many times as noses. I'm sure
everybody is thrilled to read this. I do appreciate your reply. My only
point is a very simple one----photography is for the eyes, music is for the
ears, food and drink is for a good life. So we kind of covered wine, woman
and song and visual media. It's a good life......for me being part of
Generation Rx (not X) I still want it all.    Regards and Good Luck, Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: <sstormb@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> Golden ears argument: my opinion of what is the best audio is the ultimate
> yardstick, including better than your opinion.  (love the last part)
> substitute picture and I guess you can have the golden eye argument, but I
> think James Bond has that already claimed. I have been in listening tests
> with some golden ear folks. It gets funny pretty fast. You don't have to
> worry about having a thought on the matter, it will be provided.
>
> The Audio Engineering Society is an excellent professional organization.
This
> international body sets most of the standards within the audio area. Lots
of
> differing thinking but also a great forum for exchange of good ideas.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to un
subscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Robert,

Have you seen Dmax numbers for Eclipse Satine or Legion Photo Matte?

Paul
___________________________

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Robert Morrison [mailto:rmorrison@...]
  Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 1:04 PM
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] UltraChrome ink and Photo Rag


  On 9/20/02 12:43 PM, "Bill Agee" <billagee@...> wrote:

  > Ready to dive into a new printer...
  >
  > There seems to be a divergence of opinion I noticed about papers that
  > work well with the new Epson Printers and UltraChrome inks.
  >
  > Seems I remember seeing someone...or maybe more than one post
  > saying... that Photo Rag...my favorite paper... did not fare well
  > with these inks.
  >
  > Could someone enlighten me on this?

  Antonis found that photorag only got a 1.63 dmax with the ultrachromes
using
  the epson driver...incomparison to a 1.73 dmax for EAM.  Traditionally
there
  was the opposite pattern with photorag performing better.  1.63 is less
  black than MIS FS inks get with photorag (around 1.7).  The big mystery at
  this point is how somerset enhanced (or the new epson somerset velvet)
  performs...this may be the best hope for a good rag paper with the
  ultrachromes.

  Robert


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT




  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

On 9/20/02 2:55 PM, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:

> Robert,
> 
> Have you seen Dmax numbers for
> Eclipse Satine 

1.59..however there was some slick mottling in the black.

I was just over at Brightcube saying my goodbyes the other day...they were
scheduled to declare bankruptcy that afternoon...haven't heard whether there
was a last minute buy out or not.  There is a fair bit of inventory...so
that may show up on the market eventually...will probably take months
though.  There is a commitment from the chief paper person to try to open
under another name again...if he is legally able...I'm in touch with him and
will keep people posted.  In the mean time...the back of my SUV is full of
Eclipse.

> or Legion Photo Matte?

Not yet...but within a couple of days...I just gave some to Antonis to check
on his 2200. Photo Matte looks like a potential solution...but it is really
over brightened...but that may fade off so fast that it won't be a big
issue...we'll be "aging" our paper before printing to get it to its final
color.

I really think that Somerset Enhanced may be the answer...but we'll see
about that too, shortly.  The Epson Somerset Velvet looks like it will be
over brightened as well from the specs that I've seen.

Robert

__________________________

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Morrison [mailto:rmorrison@...]
> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 1:04 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] UltraChrome ink and Photo Rag
> 
> 
> On 9/20/02 12:43 PM, "Bill Agee" <billagee@...> wrote:
> 
>> Ready to dive into a new printer...
>> 
>> There seems to be a divergence of opinion I noticed about papers that
>> work well with the new Epson Printers and UltraChrome inks.
>> 
>> Seems I remember seeing someone...or maybe more than one post
>> saying... that Photo Rag...my favorite paper... did not fare well
>> with these inks.
>> 
>> Could someone enlighten me on this?
> 
> Antonis found that photorag only got a 1.63 dmax with the ultrachromes
> using
> the epson driver...incomparison to a 1.73 dmax for EAM.  Traditionally
> there
> was the opposite pattern with photorag performing better.  1.63 is less
> black than MIS FS inks get with photorag (around 1.7).  The big mystery at
> this point is how somerset enhanced (or the new epson somerset velvet)
> performs...this may be the best hope for a good rag paper with the
> ultrachromes.
> 
> Robert
> 
> 
>       Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>             ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
>

Moreno,

I can! I buy art that is clearly the work of a craftsman. I wouldn't dream
of wasting a penny (or cent) on so-called art that is the work of people who
simply throw a tin of paint all over a canvas and proclaim it is 'art'. Call
me oldfashioned if you like, even if I do manipulate my pictures in PS to
improve their 'artistic' qualities (unless I occasionally take the perfect
picture). Not bothered about the 'sweat equity', just the experience, skill,
and imagination combined.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Moreno Polloni" <mp@...>
>
> Let's not confuse craftsmanship with art. You can't attach value a to work
> of art by the sweat equity that it took to produce it.

Bgs,

Mmm. In a recent photo competition a judge eulogised over the skill and
imagination that had obviously gone into taking a winning picture. I
laughed, as did the person who took it. Purely a random snap, while trying
out a new camera. He didn't think of any of the things that the judge said
were marvellously perceptive and original.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message -----
From: "bgs" <bgs@...>


> All that matters in art is the end result.

> I can! I buy art that is clearly the work of a craftsman. I wouldn't dream
> of wasting a penny (or cent) on so-called art that is the work of people
who
> simply throw a tin of paint all over a canvas and proclaim it is 'art'.
Call
> me oldfashioned if you like, even if I do manipulate my pictures in PS to
> improve their 'artistic' qualities (unless I occasionally take the perfect
> picture). Not bothered about the 'sweat equity', just the experience,
skill,
> and imagination combined.

Jackson Pollock is one who "splashed" paint over a canvas. You may or may
not like his work, but he's regarded as one of the more important painters
of the last century. Some of his paintings took hours to produce, rather the
than days or weeks or months of other traditional works. Did that lessen the
value of his work? Not in the least. I doubt any person or gallery that was
able to acquire one of his works cared the least how long Pollock to paint
it. Like you say, it's the skill, imagination, and experience combined.

I once saw a Robert Frank show. I couldn't believe how crappy the prints
were. Dust specks, signs of blotchy, uneven processing, flat contrast, etc..
No pure whites or blacks (sorry Jerry). The show was very well reviewed, and
no one (other than another photographer I was with) really cared about the
print quality.

> Mmm. In a recent photo competition a judge eulogised over the skill and
> imagination that had obviously gone into taking a winning picture. I
> laughed, as did the person who took it. Purely a random snap, while trying
> out a new camera. He didn't think of any of the things that the judge said
> were marvellously perceptive and original.

But isn't that typical of photo competition judges?

You make me feel proud and vindicated. The photo was for the eyes, not the
judges mouth. They shouldn't even say a word anyway. They are usually
repressed dentists who would rather do anything but dentistry. They play
tablas, guitars, sing etc. There, I said it and I'm glad.

Barry the Elder-----That's an Elderbarry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Frost" <bobfrost@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> Bgs,
>
> Mmm. In a recent photo competition a judge eulogised over the skill and
> imagination that had obviously gone into taking a winning picture. I
> laughed, as did the person who took it. Purely a random snap, while trying
> out a new camera. He didn't think of any of the things that the judge said
> were marvellously perceptive and original.
>
> Bob Frost.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "bgs" <bgs@...>
>
>
> > All that matters in art is the end result.
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Bob,

I do have a serious question. Why did this person enter this particular
photo in the competition if he didn't really feel that it had no merit?
Maybe he should stick to random snaps and new cameras. It is possible that
his intuition is better than his planning. Also, a lot of the competitions
I've been involved with are judged in private. I think it's great to have an
award ribbon and have someone say to you that they can't understand why this
photo was picked. And you can say, with a sly smile, neither can I but it's
mine. You can add Buster after that if you want.

Barry       bgs
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Frost" <bobfrost@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> Bgs,
>
> Mmm. In a recent photo competition a judge eulogised over the skill and
> imagination that had obviously gone into taking a winning picture. I
> laughed, as did the person who took it. Purely a random snap, while trying
> out a new camera. He didn't think of any of the things that the judge said
> were marvellously perceptive and original.
>
> Bob Frost.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "bgs" <bgs@...>
>
>
> > All that matters in art is the end result.
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Must have been reviewed by someone who knows nothing about photography,
and cares even less about technique and quality. Any one of those faults
should have been reason enough not to give him a show.

Except a fog scene, which probably wouldn't have any blacks, but should
have a white or near white in it somewhere.

Jerry 

> I once saw a Robert Frank show. I couldn't believe how crappy the prints
> were. Dust specks, signs of blotchy, uneven processing, flat contrast, etc..
> No pure whites or blacks (sorry Jerry). The show was very well reviewed, and
> no one (other than another photographer I was with) really cared about the
> print quality.

I've seen many a photo that was almost surely a random snapshot that got
great reviews from art critics and judges. Sometimes you CAN just take a
random shot and by hook or crook, it looks great. 

I saw a Jackson Pollack biography a few years ago that showed him
pouring housepaint from cans onto a huge canvas from a balcony. I doubt
he was  thinking of what the painting was going to look like when he
began. When he saw a composition he liked, he stopped pouring paint.
Nothing more difficult than that.

Jerry

Moreno Polloni wrote:

> 
> > Mmm. In a recent photo competition a judge eulogised over the skill and
> > imagination that had obviously gone into taking a winning picture. I
> > laughed, as did the person who took it. Purely a random snap, while trying
> > out a new camera. He didn't think of any of the things that the judge said
> > were marvellously perceptive and original.
> 
> But isn't that typical of photo competition judges?
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

> I saw a Jackson Pollack biography a few years ago that showed him
> pouring housepaint from cans onto a huge canvas from a balcony. I doubt
> he was  thinking of what the painting was going to look like when he
> began. When he saw a composition he liked, he stopped pouring paint.
> Nothing more difficult than that.

Yes, but what you're forgetting is that it took him 50 years to get to that
point.

Wonderful. I had mentioned 10,000 hours of practice on a saxophone but the
performance is the only thing people know. Jackson Pollack could draw as
could many abstract artists and they were able to go to another place
artistically because they were good draftsmen and ah, forget it. Nothing is
difficult if you don't have to do it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moreno Polloni" <mp@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 12:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Pumping up the saturation


> > I saw a Jackson Pollack biography a few years ago that showed him
> > pouring housepaint from cans onto a huge canvas from a balcony. I doubt
> > he was  thinking of what the painting was going to look like when he
> > began. When he saw a composition he liked, he stopped pouring paint.
> > Nothing more difficult than that.
>
> Yes, but what you're forgetting is that it took him 50 years to get to
that
> point.
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>