Digital BW, The Print

In a message dated 10/06/2001 7:55:12 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
mark@... writes:


> Honestly, seeing that ad in LensWork, (not inkjet!), almost got 
> me pissed. It's like when someone slams a member of your 
> family; you might not like your Momma, but nobody's got the right 
> to badmouth her! I feel like I want us to band together to give this 
> new medium some respect.
> 
> -Mark Tucker, Hand-pulled Lowlife
> 

Mark, lenswork is trying to make there photogravure(sp) and 39.00 11x14 
Huntington Witherill silver fiber prints seems even more of a bargain buy 
adding("not inkjet")
They do have a sort of anti digital flavor to there magazine. This was 
discussed on the piezo list awhile back I believe.
Maybe they should say these mass produced prints are NOT INKJET if they were 
we would have to charge more...
Steve M.






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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., sdmey4@a... wrote:
> Mark, lenswork is trying to make there photogravure(sp) and 
39.00 11x14 
> Huntington Witherill silver fiber prints seems even more of a 
bargain buy 
> adding("not inkjet")
> They do have a sort of anti digital flavor to there magazine. This 
was 
> discussed on the piezo list awhile back I believe.
> Maybe they should say these mass produced prints are NOT 
INKJET if they were 
> we would have to charge more...
> Steve M.


See -- that's exactly my point. I'm so gunshy about "our 
reputation" that even a "compliment" is taken as an insult!

But seriously, it could be better worded.

-Mark Tucker (obviously still has issues...)

grdglass@... wrote:

> <snip>  Although
> infrequent, upscale photography galleries in my area seem to show inkjets by
> famous photograpers only.  Mixed media galleries, individuals, corporations
> don't get that kiss of death stare when I tell them.
>
> Helene

Now there's the rub, huh?  Famous photographers *can* show inkjet work, not unlike other famous 'artists'
(famous in other media) showing their photos in galleries...And when asked about why they show the horrible
(in some cases) quality prints the answer is:  "That's not the point, it's about the 'imagery'" or the like.
But if you bring in prints that, god forbid, have one tiny dust spot on them, they tell you that you are not
professional.

Which brings me to the 'Five Keys To Success'* (in any creative field), in order of importance:
1:  Who you know
2: Who knows you
3:  Your ability to get along with people
4:  Your technical ability
5:  Your talent

The above is neither right, or wrong,...It is a truism.

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography

*as taught by David Lyman (founder & director), to every workshop entrant every week at the Maine Photo
Workshops (at least in 1990, when I was their studio manager).


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

> Now there's the rub, huh?  Famous photographers *can* show inkjet work, not
> unlike other famous 'artists' (famous in other media) showing their photos in
> galleries...And when asked about why they show the horrible (in some cases)
> quality prints the answer is:  "That's not the point, it's about the
> 'imagery'" or the like. But if you bring in prints that, god forbid, have one
> tiny dust spot on them, they tell you that you are not professional.

On the same vein as famous actors getting their children's
books/fictions/non-fictions published while non-famous, talented
illustrators/writers have trouble even getting their work looked at.

> Which brings me to the 'Five Keys To Success'* (in any creative field), in
> order of importance:
> 1:  Who you know
> 2: Who knows you
> 3:  Your ability to get along with people
> 4:  Your technical ability
> 5:  Your talent
> 
> The above is neither right, or wrong,...It is a truism.

That really sucks.

Carolyn

on 10/7/01 4:26 PM, Carolyn  Frayn at carolyn@... wrote:

>> Which brings me to the 'Five Keys To Success'* (in any creative field), in
>> order of importance:
>> 1:  Who you know
>> 2: Who knows you
>> 3:  Your ability to get along with people
>> 4:  Your technical ability
>> 5:  Your talent
>> 
>> The above is neither right, or wrong,...It is a truism.
> 
> That really sucks.

I don't think it sucks at all.

As a filmmaker I had to hire creative people. I could only hire people I had
heard of ('who you know').

I would generally hire people I had worked with ('who knows you') before
because I knew they were good to work with and produced great results (it
was my ass on the line, after all).

I would not hire even the most prodigiously talented person if the hassle of
working with them outweighed their talent. There are two kinds of
troublesome creative types: people who are good trouble (you hire them
knowing they are going to cause you grief, but they're worth it) and people
who are bad trouble (you don't hire them).

I would ONLY EVER hire someone whose technical ability was near-perfect. All
the talent in the world doesn't make up for not being able to focus a camera
or take an exposure reading or boom an interview.

Once the first four bases are covered, then you can start considering how
talented people are.

Did this mean I turned away hordes of talented DPs and soundmen and editors
in favour of the merely competent? OF COURSE NOT. I just hired the talented
people who had taken care of business.

Lots of people have talent. You have to have more than that. So many people
think they have a talent ergo they should be successful. Most of the time
they're wrong on the first count. Those who really have talent don't mind
paying their dues... from apprentice to journeyman to master.

Someone once said that genius was the ability to take infinite pains and I
agree with that. Unfortunately we teach kids today that all should have
prizes and life ain't like that.

-- 
John Brownlow

http://www.pinkheadedbug.com

Thanks for your interesting perspective John. :-)

> Lots of people have talent. You have to have more than that. So many people
> think they have a talent ergo they should be successful. Most of the time
> they're wrong on the first count. Those who really have talent don't mind
> paying their dues... from apprentice to journeyman to master.

Agreed. 

> Someone once said that genius was the ability to take infinite pains and I
> agree with that. Unfortunately we teach kids today that all should have
> prizes and life ain't like that.

I agree with this too... one of the reasons I am tough on my sons and their
choices. You have to balance love and support with real life consequences to
their decisions.

Carolyn

on 10/7/01 7:31 PM, Carolyn  Frayn at carolyn@... wrote:

>> Someone once said that genius was the ability to take infinite pains and I
>> agree with that. Unfortunately we teach kids today that all should have
>> prizes and life ain't like that.
> 
> I agree with this too... one of the reasons I am tough on my sons and their
> choices. You have to balance love and support with real life consequences to
> their decisions.

good for you!

I try to do the same with my 2-year old but he is gratifyingly often ahead
of me... I say 'tidy up your train set' only to find he already has. I can't
take any credit for it at all... I think he got pernickety genes from
somewhere... definitely not me or my wife... I guess it skipped a
generation.


-- 
John Brownlow

http://www.pinkheadedbug.com

>>> Someone once said that genius was the ability to take infinite pains and I
>>> agree with that. Unfortunately we teach kids today that all should have
>>> prizes and life ain't like that.
>> 
>> I agree with this too... one of the reasons I am tough on my sons and their
>> choices. You have to balance love and support with real life consequences to
>> their decisions.
> 
> good for you!
> 
> I try to do the same with my 2-year old but he is gratifyingly often ahead
> of me... I say 'tidy up your train set' only to find he already has. I can't
> take any credit for it at all... I think he got pernickety genes from
> somewhere... definitely not me or my wife... I guess it skipped a
> generation.

Enjoy that age! ... sounds like a lawyer or a doctor... no creative mess
genes!  My boys are 8, 13 and 16. Just wait... when they get to be teenagers
you have to use creative discipline... 'cause try as you might, you just
can't pick them up and carry them to their rooms! :-)  At least not the
200lb 16 year old!  Pernickety genes... from your description of your film
making flow you have quite a few of those!  :-D

Carolyn