Is "alternative process" and excuse for boring subject matter?

Oranges

A
Oranges

  • 4
  • 0
  • 97
Charging Station

A
Charging Station

  • 0
  • 0
  • 91
Paintin' growth

D
Paintin' growth

  • 3
  • 0
  • 83
Spain

A
Spain

  • 5
  • 0
  • 81

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,118
Messages
2,769,902
Members
99,563
Latest member
WalSto
Recent bookmarks
0

clay

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2002
Messages
1,335
Location
Asheville, N
Format
Multi Format
ROFLMAO

blansky said:
Let's just call a spade a spade here.

ALL alt process is pretentious, self conscious, posturing and almost always boring as hell.

If it weren't, why would every print need to shout out that is alt process, and therefore a very special print.

It has to do this because it can't stand alone on merit but need the alt process label to prove its meager worth.

"I only print platinum, I must be an artist"

" I suck as a image, but never mind I'm bromoil"

"I'm all blue, on purpose."



Give me a break.


Michael
 

John McCallum

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
2,407
Location
New Zealand
Format
Multi Format
blansky said:
Let's just call a spade a spade here.

ALL alt process is pretentious, self conscious, posturing and almost always boring as hell.

If it weren't, why would every print need to shout out that is alt process, and therefore a very special print.

Silver Gelatin anyone?


Regarding the boring subjects bit. Probably been said but I suspect it's evolved that way. Slow methodical intensely contemplative. You need a subject that won't move much. And it's bound to be desirable to choose subjects with characteristics that will exploit the benefits of the process and materials.

Of course it's more convenient to photograph stuff on the kitchen table with a huge, delicate old camera too. Not many people lugg the woppers out into the wilds or make models wait while they set the thing up in the studio. There are other film methods more convenient for that.

Obviously it wasn't always that way. There used to be no choice. So perhaps alt process photography today has lost something to that.
 

scootermm

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 10, 2004
Messages
1,864
Location
Austin, TX
Format
ULarge Format
Im throwing in the towel... anyone want a 7x17 and a a couple hundred negatives and shoudy prints?

:D

I think Blansky is a internetforum-lyrical genius.
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
blansky said:
Let's just call a spade a spade here.

ALL alt process is pretentious, self conscious, posturing and almost always boring as hell.

If it weren't, why would every print need to shout out that is alt process, and therefore a very special print.

It has to do this because it can't stand alone on merit but need the alt process label to prove its meager worth.

"I only print platinum, I must be an artist"

" I suck as a image, but never mind I'm bromoil"

"I'm all blue, on purpose."



Give me a break.


Michael

Giclee anyone? How about a nice carbon print from your inkjet? Or for color, maybe a C-print is more to your liking?

Or would your just prefer one of "them pictures"?


Sandy
 

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
19,974
Location
Honolulu, HI
Format
Large Format
I suppose any process or tool can become a gimmick--alt-processes, Holga, Leica, Hasselblad, disposable cameras, Velvia, Tri-X in Rodinal, whatever.
 

rfshootist

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
383
Location
Old Europe
Format
35mm RF
MurrayMinchin said:
I think anybody pointing fingers at one group of photographers should first cast a critical eye towards the group they belong to. Me thinks the ratio of so-so to amazing work is the same for every genre.
Murray

Overall ? Maybe. There is a bunch of boring stuff everywhere. But we speak about what happens in this community here, which is, concerning craft ,knowledge and artistic concepts above the average level of other web galleries.

bertram
 

Claire Senft

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
3,239
Location
Milwaukee, W
Format
35mm
Having to use an alternate process is just too extreme. Just being Blansky is alrerady way more pretension than any human being should ever even aspire to. Mike why not reveal your secret pudding head process?
 

RAP

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2002
Messages
476
Format
4x5 Format
It is very easy to duplicate, simulate alternative processes either digitally or by anolog just by controlling exposure, density, contrast and print color. So what then is the artist selling and what is the public buying, a process, an image , marriage of both?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4715106.stm

Here is a print by Steichen,who was known for working with experimental processes, that sold for a record $2.9 million at auction. Read the article and look at the image and ask yourself, why would someone pay that much for a photograph? Is the image itself that great, is it the process; "autochrome - a revolutionary method of producing colour photographs," the rarity-only 3 prints inexistence, by a world renouned, dead artist?
 

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council
Advertiser
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
11,546
Location
Washington DC
Format
Multi Format
RAP said:
It is very easy to duplicate, simulate alternative processes either digitally or by anolog just by controlling exposure, density, contrast and print color.

Oh Contraire, mon frere. Silver gelatin does NOT have the tonal range of platinum or albumen. You MIGHT be able to fake some of the alt processes digitally on an inkjet printer, but it is still an analog to, and not an exact replica of, an alt process print. Alt processes are labor intensive enough - mimicking them in silver or inkjet requires an exponentially greater effort and investment in time and materials than just doing it the right way the first time around. You're suggesting that you can use a shovel as a screwdriver - theoretically it is possible, but just use the tool that was designed to do the job you want to do instead of forcing something else to fit.
 

unregistered

Member
Joined
May 4, 2006
Messages
290
Format
Multi Format
RAP said:
...why would someone pay that much for a photograph? Is the image itself that great, is it the process; "autochrome - a revolutionary method of producing colour photographs," the rarity-only 3 prints inexistence, by a world renouned, dead artist?

Just so they can say they have a Steichen most likely. The shot itself isn't anything special, and one has to wonder if he shot it just as a test for the process, since it has the full range of values in it...from bright sunlight to deep shadows.

3 prints are probably all he needed to get the answers he wanted about the technique. But to pay that amount for it...someone should have their head examined.
 

RAP

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2002
Messages
476
Format
4x5 Format
The silver process has quite a bit of latitude and can adapt to contrast needs, toners etc to give the desired results depending on materials, ones skills, the negative, etc.

Still, how many can tell the difference when looking at the final image hanging on the wall and does it really matter? If you saw that Steichen print posted here on APUG, hanging in a gallery, what would be your response? What sort of comments would you give to the photographer who posted it? Too dark maybe, dodge here, burn there? Would you buy it and if so why?

Personally I too, think the image itself is not so great, dark, simplistic, blurry, no detail, no texture, what Weston and AA would have called the fuzzy wussies. In fact, did not AA and Weston form Group 64 in response to what Steichen and others were promoting, the painterly effect in photography as compared to "straight" photography? AA left MOMA for a time in protest to Steichen taking over as head of the photography dept.

Still, The Pond-Moonlight, taken in New York in 1904, that print is worth $2.9 million because someone paid that amount. What has made that Steichen print so valuable now? Was it the autochrome process itself, something I would classify as an alternative process? Right now it seems that silver images are selling very well at galleries, is it because it is considered a dying process, just as the autochrome process is dead. So it seems to me that part of the value of that Steichen print is tied up in the now obsolete autochrome process.

If that is the case, what does that say about the future value of all the analog processes no matter what they are?
 

clay

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2002
Messages
1,335
Location
Asheville, N
Format
Multi Format
Yeah, no doubt. And all that hoopla about Da Vinci - I mean come on. A picture of some chick in black with barely a smile on her face? What's the big deal? I've seen giclee's of that stupid picture for less than a hundred bucks. Heck, if you can find the right issue, you can just tear apart a National Geographic and frame the print from that. Yeah, don't get it at all. Idiots.

Alexis Neel said:
Just so they can say they have a Steichen most likely. The shot itself isn't anything special, and one has to wonder if he shot it just as a test for the process, since it has the full range of values in it...from bright sunlight to deep shadows.

3 prints are probably all he needed to get the answers he wanted about the technique. But to pay that amount for it...someone should have their head examined.
 
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
892
Location
New Jersey
Format
Large Format
sanking said:
...Let's say, for exmaple, that you do a portfolio on gas station toilets...
I had a very serious discussion about 10 years ago with a buddy who was keen on traveling the "Blue Highways" and documenting restrooms in all the greasy diners and dive gas stations.

Who are you really and what else do you know about my past? Creepy...very creepy. I like it.
 

smieglitz

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
1,950
Location
Climax, Michigan
Format
Large Format
Well, here I go getting hooked into this thread again after I thought I was done with it.

The Steichen print, "Pond-Moonlight 1904" is a multiple gum bichromate over platinum print, not an autochrome.

In my opinion it is one of the top 3 photographic images I've ever seen. I saw the original print during the "On the Art of Fixing a Shadow" exhibition celebrating the 150th anniversary of photography at the Art Institute of Chicago. It is exquisite and the person who bought it obviously has refined taste since theirs agrees with mine. :cool: If you don't agree, oh well, and "Tut tut. It looks like rain."

Speculate all you want about Steichen's motives in creating it (I doubt it experimental since gum printing was Steichen's forte), whether an inkjet could match it (blasphemy IMO), whether it is worth 2.9 million (someone obviously thought so and I'm glad, no overjoyed, now that it ranks as the most expensive photograph especially given the ludicrous price paid for Prince's rephotographed Marlboro Man), etc.

The fact remains that it is a recognized masterpiece of photographic art and will only appreciate in value.

Joe
 
Last edited by a moderator:

catem

Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
1,358
Location
U.K.
Format
Multi Format
smieglitz said:
whether it is worth 2.9 million (someone obviously thought so and I'm glad, no overjoyed, now that it ranks as the most expensive photograph especially given the ludicrous price paid for Prince's rephotographed Marlboro Man), etc.
Joe
Exactly. I can see where the arguments lie for this particular print and am pleased that it's this one one rather than some others it could be (though the amount of money is still, at least in my world, bizarre, and the singling out of this particular print is also to a certain extent random). The art market is a strange beast. It's difficult to define or predict what kind of 'art' (including photography) will command these huge prices.

I think in the end a lot of it comes down to the whim of those who happen to have the big bucks.....They make the winners, the 'celebrity' artists, and pick certain artists from the past above others.
 

Kerik

Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Messages
1,634
Location
California
Format
Large Format
smieglitz said:
The fact remains that it is a recognized masterpiece of photographic art and will only appreciate in value.

Joe
Indeed. I doubt the same will be true of the rediculous Marlboro man piece.
 

unregistered

Member
Joined
May 4, 2006
Messages
290
Format
Multi Format
clay said:
Yeah, no doubt. And all that hoopla about Da Vinci - I mean come on. A picture of some chick in black with barely a smile on her face? What's the big deal? I've seen giclee's of that stupid picture for less than a hundred bucks. Heck, if you can find the right issue, you can just tear apart a National Geographic and frame the print from that. Yeah, don't get it at all. Idiots.

Excuse me, but did you just call me an idiot?
 

RAP

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2002
Messages
476
Format
4x5 Format
So then the conclusion is that the highest price for a photograph at auction went to an alternative process, multiple gum bichromate over platinum print, not an autochrome, according to smieglitz.

If that is where the money is going, maybe we should all start taking alternative process workshops!

PS So I wonder what experimental process used today will command such high prices at auction 100 years from now? Dare I say the "D" word?
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom