Diane Arbus - SFMOMA Exhibit

[rolleiLeicafilm]

Has anyone had a good look at the SFMOMA Diane Arbus exhibit? The museum label said that all prints were by Diane except where noted. Diane shows a black border on most of her prints. The black border accentuates that the image is square to the mat at the bottom but not at the top. Has anyone else noticed this? was this a print error (enlarger not aligned) or was Diane doing this on purpose? Are the matts crooked?

https://www.sfmoma.org/exhibition/diane-arbus-beginning/

 

[falotico]

You have got a good eye. I saw the exhibit and I am almost sure that the matts were crooked. Most of the prints--all of them were black and white--looked like they were a product of the same enlarger. Arbus took the pictures and printed the photos herself. She used two different developers for the prints and in the exhibit there is a slight yellowing which might be due to this process. The blacks are developed to a full gama which has a hint of red in it. For eighty percent of the prints there is not a speck of dust visible on the negative or on the final print. This gives you an idea of how closely Arbus studied her own work. One enlargement shows a speck of dust on the negative. I assume this image was not printed by Arbus.

 

[Bill Burk]

I spent some time at the show and what I enjoyed most were her very early, small, trimmed prints.

I saw only one where she had to allow some skewed frame area to show on top because trimming it would have ruined the picture.

I didn't count, but there were only a few black border prints.

falotico, I saw some prints which could have used some retouching for dust specks, but I guess we agree, there were only a handful of those. They wouldn't have needed much, just a few specks, and from a distance you can't see them.

 

[Hilo]

I am in Europe and haven't seen this exhibition. But I have the book, which I like a lot ! Some of the early work is really beautiful, and new to me.

I also have the first edition of her 1972 Aperture Monograph (yes, with the raincoats girls) and just had another look to confirm what I already thought: the fact is that she sometimes has black borders on top and bottom, but not left and right. Or she has black borders left and right and not top and bottom. Then, in both cases, one black border can be much thinner or even absent because she was not very precise when placing the negatives.
The reason is simple, she used an enlarger with a negative holder that was very tight and just did not include full black borders. The early Meopta enlargers were like that. Maybe she used a US made equivalent. The reason why sometimes the borders show at the top and bottom, and sometimes left and right, is because she either put the neg strip in from left to right, or from front to back. 6X6 negatives often do not have the exact same size for top/bottom versus left/right. Or, it can also be so that she used different cameras. Negatives sizes are hardly ever precisely the same between cameras.

Anyway, I don't think her estate would accept mats that cover parts of the image. In her case the black borders belong to the image.

 

[rolleiLeicafilm]

Thanks for the details all. It has been difficult to find any insight on this via google searches. Also, i could not determine if there are any books covering her darkroom processes and standards - where the magic happens. Maybe 'Diane Arbus: Revelations"? https://www.amazon.ca/Diane-Arbus-Revelations-Doon/dp/0375506209

Hilo, unfortunately, i think you would have to see the prints in person to understand the crookedness we are talking about. I think she used an Omega enlarger and i've read she played with the black border size and definition throughout her career. I thought that maybe her enlarger was not aligned properly since it was her early work and these were never before seen prints.

Anyway, i found this anomaly distracting when looking at each photo that was affected. After a local month long photography festival, i have seen plenty of sloppy matting and framing mistakes. It was disappointing to see this at SFMOMA... if that is the case.

 

[Hilo]

Yes, not seeing the framed prints keeps me guessing.

When you scroll down on the page of the link below you find a framed image of her photo "Child with toy hand grenade". Does this show what you are talking about? To me that mat is pretty good, except I would have given the top a bit more white over the image.

http://untappedcities.com/2016/07/12/diane-arbus-in-the-beginning-opens-at-met-breuer-nyc/

 

[rolleiLeicafilm]

Thanks for your critical input as well, Richard. Highly valuable. We learned something about you from that.

Hilo: no, the later photos look great.

 

[CMoore]

I remember when MOMA was part The War Memorial Opera House.
All that stuff was free in the 1960's, then it (Aquaium, MOMA, Asian Art, Etc) were Free on...i think it was the Third Wednesday of Every Month.
Taking a quick look at their site, it looks like there are no free days anymore.?

Anyway.....she certainly had an interesting Career/Life.