RE: processes.....

From: Schuyler Grace ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 08/19/04-12:52:53 PM Z
Message-id: <E1Bxs1m-0006r2-00@snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net>

Personally (and forgive me, as a new subscriber to the list, if I step on
any toes), I think all the digital chatter is just a function of digital
processes being new, unfamiliar, and promising potential components of our
art/craft. Because of the revival of "alternative" processes, there are now
a number of good references regarding techniques that have evolved over the
history of photography, and much of the work being done with chemistry today
is simply refining or building upon prior art. Digital techniques, however,
are a new frontier, and as such, there isn't the established base of
reliable knowledge for folks to build upon. But that doesn't make digital
any less worthy of discussion in this forum than any other component of
alt/antique processes.

To me, this list serves two purposes:

1. It's a knowledge base, enabling experienced practitioners to share with
those who are less experienced in a particular process or other aspect of
this field; and

2. It's a forum for discussion of new techniques that may contribute to the
growth of "alternative" photography as an outlet for our creative energies.

If you think about it, this list is supposedly exclusively about
"alternative" (i.e., non-silver) processes, but many of us use
traditional/modern silver-based film to capture the original image. To
decry the current weight of digital-related posts, it would seem to me, is
no different than complaining the list has too many posts regarding silver
negative density ranges for platinum or gum printing.

I love my big old 8x10 camera. However, given my current state of
day-job-type employment, I'd never be able to afford even a fraction of the
gear I've amassed. Other folks are in the same boat, or don't have room
enough to build a darkroom, or simply want to express visions that don't
exist in the "real" world. For them, digital is a perfectly acceptable
means to an end, but they still share a bond with the list in that they are
using digitally generated source material with one or more alternative
processes.

Just my two cents worth...

-Schuyler Grace

-----Original Message-----
From: Marie Wohadlo [mailto:mwohadlo@press.uchicago.edu]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 10:31 AM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: processes.....

Alt should be open-minded, not kneejerk. I am not anti-digital. I work on a
computer all day, and I've been using 'em for 20 years. This is a list
about PROCESSES, not product. I am not trying to narrow the focus, but
don't you enjoy being engaged in these debates? I am not out to crush
someone's viewpoint, merely to discuss.

Tell me if ALT does not mean alternative in the title of this list. I guess
you could say ANYthing is an alternative to another, if pitted against each
other. I just think it's odd to see such a digital preoccupation on the
alt-photo list.
Received on Thu Aug 19 12:52:57 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 09/14/04-09:17:59 AM Z CST