2006 B&W Special Portfolio Issue

[Kirk Keyes]

So, who is Simon Larbalestier?

Robert - Google is your friend.

Kirk

 

[roteague]

Robert - Google is your friend.

Kirk

I know exactly how to use Google, but then I couldn't make my point - that many on APUG have very myoptic views about photography, only centering on their own viewpoint of photography only, failing to realize that there are other types of photography and other interests. I wonder how many here know who Peter Dombrovskis is?

 

[david b]

I am with Ryan on this one.

If the image was only viewed on a monitor, how can B+W still be considered as a source for the serious B+W collector?

For instance, say I see something in the mag that I want to buy. I contact the "photographer" and he says he never made a print but would try to. A bit of time goes by and he can't do it because of equipment issues or even financial reasons, such as money to buy the right printer, etc.

I wonder what the issue would have looked like if they viewed actual prints, digital or otherwise.

 

[User Removed]

Good point Dave.

I've seen alot of images reproduced in B&W magazine, and below it says something like "original in color". Is that right? B&W magazine has always been geared to the collector of black and white photography.

Personally, I feel that the actual subject matter and IMAGE is the most important part of creating a photograph, however the technical and PRINTING of that image is just as important! Some of these people that submit work to B&W magazine might have an AMAZING photograph that shows up on their computer screen, but what if they have no clue how to print it and make a print to match their screen?! As a collector of fine art photography, I would be pissed if I saw a beautiful image in B&W magazine and purchased it from the photographer and it look totally different because they don't know how to print!

 

[jovo]

Does anyone know anything about B&W editor, Henry Rasmussen? I wonder what qualifies him to be a curator of photography in the first place. He claims final responsibility for the special edition selectees, but I've never read anything about him...is he a photographer? scholar? former Road and Track stringer? loan shark? pornographer? circus acrobat? or what? Brooks Jensen has been pretty forthcoming about his background, why not Henry? Or Ailsa of the UK "Black and White Photography" magazine

(I suspect the above sounds a bit like a challenge, but that's not my intention. I'm genuinely curious and interested.)

 

[c6h6o3]

It almost seems to me that so many photographs have been done over the years that someone cannot create something new without being compared to a photograph from the past. For example someone photographs a bell pepper, its compared to Edward Weston's peppers....so why not just make your picture blurry, because then you will be creating someone new and different. Right!? Hmmm...

There's nothing new about what Edward Weston called the "fuzzy wuzzies" - William Mortensen and his ilk.

 

[DBP]

The work can't be all that beautiful, or you would have remembered her name. But at least it was good enough for you to remember the gender.

Not at all. I forget names of people all the time. Thought I was actually having mental problems until I realized I was meeting several hundred people per year. Just too much data to maintain.

 

[clay]

Not to be a smartie pants either, but he is the editor of the magazine. There are not requirements or qualifications for this job. He gets to do things the way he wants in that position. For good or bad. The marketplace will vote with their wallet. If he does a bad enough job over a long enough time, he won't be picking winners anymore because the magazine will disappear. IOW, he was elected by everyone who subscribes or shells out $8 on the news stand for the magazine.

Does anyone know anything about B&W editor, Henry Rasmussen? I wonder what qualifies him to be a curator of photography in the first place. He claims final responsibility for the special edition selectees, but I've never read anything about him...is he a photographer? scholar? former Road and Track stringer? loan shark? pornographer? circus acrobat? or what? Brooks Jensen has been pretty forthcoming about his background, why not Henry? Or Ailsa of the UK "Black and White Photography" magazine

(I suspect the above sounds a bit like a challenge, but that's not my intention. I'm genuinely curious and interested.)

 

[DBP]

These are not mutually exclusive alternatives. I think you're being a tad overly sensitive even if the post came across as a dig. I assure you it wasn't.

The poster lives in the same metro area as I do and that's what really caught my eye. I haven't seen any work from photographic artists local to the Washington, DC area which I find compelling.

When I do see work which grabs me, I make it my business to find out who the artist is and I always remember it, no matter where they're from. I write it down or enter it into my PDA. I was only trying to jog the memory of the poster, and that failing, to goad him into doing the legwork necessary to find out who it was.

If there are any fine photographers around here I would earnestly like to know who they are.

I can't remember names, but I remember locations. The gallery is in the Torpedo Factory, bottom level, East side, near the torpedo, north of the main stairs. The space is shared with a woman who does mixed media. Photos, are on the left. The image I was lusting after was a print of lawn furniture in the snow, where she had flipped the negative to make it look like a conference. Nice composition and a lovely range of tones in a big print (maybe 15x40).

 

[c6h6o3]

Not at all. I forget names of people all the time. Thought I was actually having mental problems until I realized I was meeting several hundred people per year. Just too much data to maintain.

You mentioned that she has a gallery. Is it in The Torpedo Factory? Somewhere else in Old Town?

 

[c6h6o3]

You mentioned that she has a gallery. Is it in The Torpedo Factory? Somewhere else in Old Town?

never mind. got it, thanks. I'll go by there.

 

[photobum]

Ryan, Given the high repute of your school I'm sorry to hear you reinforce my view. W. Eugene Smith had a lot of strong political and creation views. You never had to try to figure out what he was trying to say. His photographs hit you between the eyes with clarity of concept. You also knew you were looking at art.

 

[User Removed]

Ryan, Given the high repute of your school I'm sorry to hear you reinforce my view. W. Eugene Smith had a lot of strong political and creation views. You never had to try to figure out what he was trying to say. His photographs hit you between the eyes with clarity of concept. You also knew you were looking at art.

I was in no way making reference to Eugene Smith and his work. The Center For Creative Photography is an amazing place, however the photography department at UofA has no association with the Center. I was making reference to how I feel about the current students and instructors work at the school. I'm the ONLY photographer in the whole department that shoots large format and does traditional "straight forward" photography. Of course, my work is look down on because it does not have some deep hidden concept.

Art/photography schools have changed alot over the past several years, and I'm not sure if its for the better.

 

[finny99]

i thought there was really fine work in the issue, and it must be really hard to pick from 1000's of images, I was glad to see some Canadian talent in there

 

[dmr1]

I thought for the most part the images were very good. I for one would give my left nut to be published in B&W and if they want submissions via disk then so would they get it. As always, it seems to be another case of those who can ..do and those who cant ........piss and moan. In addition i happen to know two of the photographers with work in the recent issue and can assure you they will produce all the darkroom prints you care to order.

I have no axe to grind either way and mean no insult to anyone. If you dont like the work in the issue fine. But some of the comments here seem to be rather obtuse and of the type created by those who cant think out of the small box they seem to be trapped in. I suggest a box cutter in all of our pockets. You can either use it to take down a wall or two of your box and realize there is a whole world out there that does not revolve around 1 dimensional thinking, or slash your wrists when the publisher calls and God forbid would like your portfolio via disk or should ask if you have any of that funky soft focus stuff and all you have to offer are those tack sharp landscapes of the ilk of Lord ANsel and a bell pepper or two ala Weston.

As always, just my opinion.....I could be wrong.

 

[clay]

Bravo. It's a big world with more than one way to make a photograph.

I have no axe to grind either way and mean no insult to anyone. If you dont like the work in the issue fine. But some of the comments here seem to be rather obtuse and of the type created by those who cant think out of the small box they seem to be trapped in. I suggest a box cutter in all of our pockets. You can either use it to take down a wall or two of your box and realize there is a whole world out there that does not revolve around 1 dimensional thinking, or slash your wrists when the publisher calls and God forbid would like your portfolio via disk or should ask if you have any of that funky soft focus stuff and all you have to offer are those tack sharp landscapes of the ilk of Lord ANsel and a bell pepper or two ala Weston.

As always, just my opinion.....I could be wrong.

 

[Jorge]

Of course the other side of the coin is accepting lesser quality for the sake of expediency. I would have thought that a magazine that caters to collectors who unless I am mistaken will most likely want a print on paper would have at least asked for a print from the top contestants. But nooooooo.....asking for something like this automagically becomes a reason to be labeled as trapped in a "small box". Well if so, so be it, but please do not hide under the disguise of "fairness" and tell us that you have no ax to grind when your post is as obtuse and pissy as some of the others you mention.....

QED.

I have no axe to grind either way and mean no insult to anyone. If you dont like the work in the issue fine. But some of the comments here seem to be rather obtuse and of the type created by those who cant think out of the small box they seem to be trapped in. I suggest a box cutter in all of our pockets. You can either use it to take down a wall or two of your box and realize there is a whole world out there that does not revolve around 1 dimensional thinking, or slash your wrists when the publisher calls and God forbid would like your portfolio via disk or should ask if you have any of that funky soft focus stuff and all you have to offer are those tack sharp landscapes of the ilk of Lord ANsel and a bell pepper or two ala Weston.

As always, just my opinion.....I could be wrong.

 

[Mike Lopez]

I know exactly how to use Google, but then I couldn't make my point - that many on APUG have very myoptic views about photography, only centering on their own viewpoint of photography only, failing to realize that there are other types of photography and other interests. I wonder how many here know who Peter Dombrovskis is?

I loathe anything by Photographer X. Check out Photographer Y.

 

[Jim Chinn]

I would have no problem submitting work via a CD or sending a file. Just seems strange that someone who champions the collection of fine pixelgraphs or photographic prints would not even hold a single one produced by the artist in his hands before making a final judgement.

 

[clay]

I'm guessing it had more to do with efficiency and convenience than anything else. Can you imagine the hassle of trying to return prints from 1500 portfolios? I can only guess what it would be like to try to weed out losers from stacks of paper prints.

I would have no problem submitting work via a CD or sending a file. Just seems strange that someone who champions the collection of fine pixelgraphs or photographic prints would not even hold a single one produced by the artist in his hands before making a final judgement.

 

[Jim Chinn]

I understand the impracticality of looking at 1500 prints. But perhaps prints from the final "cut" of 2 or 3 people for every slot in the magazine would be doable.

Anyway, I understand this is the way things are done today and I would guess that most if not all magazines have the photography digital files sent directly to the printer from the source. If thier is no longer a physical reason to actually have a print or chrome then why waste the time looking at one.

As far as this special issue goes, I think it is far better then the first one with a much less formula approach. Like any "best of" or compilation issue there is some very good work, some stuff I scratch my head at and a whole range in between.

 

[User Removed]

I'm guessing it had more to do with efficiency and convenience than anything else. Can you imagine the hassle of trying to return prints from 1500 portfolios? I can only guess what it would be like to try to weed out losers from stacks of paper prints.

Well you have to think...they probably would not have had 1,500 portfolio submissions if they required people to submit an actual portfolio of PHOTOGRAPHIC PRINTS. Its alot easier for someone to send an email with abunch of images attached, than construct a real portfolio to send out.

 

[Kirk Keyes]

I'm the ONLY photographer in the whole department that shoots large format and does traditional "straight forward" photography. Of course, my work is look down on because it does not have some deep hidden concept.

Don't feel bad, Ryan. That idea is alive and well here at APUG too. Remember the "Apparent Confusion about Artistic Expression" thread?