• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

In The American West


Penn printed with deep blacks going further up the scale than others to make his prints more bold, I have seen in hand a very large ( motorcycle dude) and the shadows were definitely crunched to a large degree. I have also seen in my shop one of the Small Trades portraits much smaller that had the same traits.
 

Attachments

  • download.jpg
    9.1 KB · Views: 66
The eternal return of the same. Nietzsche was right.

I don't like Avedon's work

{This offtopic diversion was split off of the place it originally posted in: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/how-big-can-one-print-mf.212291/} I recall seeing a lot of huge square blow-ups of Avedon's shots of factory workers and so forth against his usual blank white backdrops, up high...
www.photrio.com
 

I totally forgot about that thread. I blame you for reminding me!

 
In a book a out the project his assistant Laura Wilson , a western photographer herself , wrote 752 people were photographed and 123 portraits selected for the exhibition. The book is Avedon at work published by university Texas Press. It is a very interesting book about the work of Avedon in the american west
 
DREW WILEY said:
In terms of importing models, the bee keeper was an infamous example. It's an interesting book, but so saturated with pretense and Avedon's personal advertising ethos, that it tells us way more about him than the "West".
Click to expand...

Got to agree with that. The bee keeper photo is completely false and should not have been included.
 
Conversation always gets interesting when a sacred cow is involved. One person's god is another person's hamburger.

If I were to spend time at the Amon Carter Museum, I'd be far more interested in the prints of Laura Gilpin - that's someone who had real empathy with her subjects, and wasn't just making a curiosity insect collection out of them, pinned to a white sheet.
 
Last edited:
DREW WILEY said:
I'd be far more interested in the prints of Laura Gilpin - that's someone who had real empathy with her subjects, and wasn't just making a curiosity insect collection out of them, pinned to a blah blah blah
Click to expand...

If I was fortunate enough to be visiting this museum I would love to see both of these artists actually. What a fine day of art tourism that would be.

It’s possible to enjoy both artists, you know, and there’s really no requirement to publicly shit on one artist in order to enjoy the other unless this is really about posturing. It’s clear from your generous posting history that you have a need to shit on Avedon, and that’s fine I suppose, but maybe after all of your efforts you can recognize that your point has at long last been made, and just, you know, let it go.
 
Gee, Fellas.

We saw the show in the 80s at the Corcoran, bought the book, met Avedon.

While we had some (small) reservations about the treatment of (some of) the subjects, we nonetheless enjoyed it for what it was - a performance by an artist, and not needing to have been vetted for purity/honesty of intent, approach, or execution.
 
Alan Edward Klein said:
Where do you store 17,000 8x10s?
Click to expand...
I have read more than one source that says only the ones that were in the final collection were kept (at the Amon Carter) and the remaining were destroyed. Next time I am at the Carter, I intend to ask the librarian. Most of Avedon's "archives" are at the Center for Creative Photography at the University of Arizona.

One article: Source: https://tmcl.ca/posted/2022/4/8/in-the-american-west


"All but 123 of the negatives were intentionally destroyed when the project was completed. The 123 remaining negatives are in the collection of the Amon Carter museum, with the photographer’s directive that they never be printed from again."
 

Well, that's nice to know. I'd pity the guy who would have had to scan all 17,000.
 
They do have thousands of Gilpin negs in storage; but that constitutes her remaining lifetime quantity, much like the Dorothea Lange collection at the Oakland Museum. But frankly, it's Avedon's lesser known work I would probably want to see, and not the usual stereotypical images.
 
koraks said:
Any museum or institutional collection would. They're doing this on a massive scale currently.
Click to expand...

It is a very good idea for estates to get a real handle on what they are holding, We work with many over the years , in our case we scan and print the Hero images, but then pass on to others to bulk scan the rest.
This can be a good investment for the estate.
 
Gosh, I can hardly bear the thought of digitally recording my own print collection for cataloging purposes, despite having made a deluxe copy station for that express purpose. But I'd certainly like to facilitate the process for estate purposes. The problem museums with major collections often face is finding sufficient funding for the dedicated staff assigned to such projects. Sure, there are institutions in major cities like around here which stay ahead of the curve, which hold the works of marquis names; but an awful lot remains in limbo elsewhere, or has already been permanently lost. Anything on nitrate negative stock is pretty much doomed from an insurance standpoint anyway, unless frozen.

One thing I admire is how a well-heeled regional collector went out of his way to collect only the prints of otherwise completely unknown photographers, and then donated the entire collection to the SFMMA. It can be amazing what one stumbles onto among lesser known work sometimes, especially in the antique category, in some forgotten attic box, for example.
 
There are investment groups as well as foundations here in Canada that actually finance collections, I suspect its a global thing , we are working with two groups right now. Buyer beware though the funding required for some of these projects is over 100k in investment to do it correctly.

For my personal work I have over the years done high resolution scans of all the film I have made, so not only do I have the original but also good files to separate out to make my prints.
 
Here in the US, a lot of funding is being drastically stripped. Fed grants have long been important to museums; but it's a new era, and that fact is too evident to warrant any further comment even if that were appropriate here.

My own digi copying needs are only for sake of cataloging, so a DLSR is entirely sufficient. I don't print digitally, and once turned down a working drum scanner - no place to put it, or time to fuss around with it. Speaking of time - I gotta get to work on the back lawn, since it's not as cold or howling windy as yesterday afternoon. But there are still sneaker wave warnings along the shore, due to the Kamchatka earthquake.
 
Last edited:
I admire what Brett did too; but he didn't destroy all of them. His Father Edward left his own negatives behind as a source of family income, with Cole making prints from them. It took Cole awhile to establish his own niche as an exceptional photographer, and that was in color instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register