Re: Krappy Kamera Show (I juried it)

From: SteveS ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 01/10/05-01:43:35 AM Z
Message-id: <002101c4f6e8$1825c2f0$5204e4d8@VALUED65BAD02C>

Weston did his prints withe a dangling light bulb and one print frame. He
had a couple lenses for a 'bellows extention camera.' His ethics was to
make pictures that were not fuzzy or lacking in full tonality.

The foreground was as clear as the backgroun, and development was
'complete.' In no way would he have had any contempt for pictures that were
clear and well developed no matter what camera was used. One of his pals
used a cigar box with a hole in it.

My comment was a double edged sword. The proof is in the application, it
cuts both ways. Unified and pure, not some clarity and some 'fancy
justification' because the camera wasn't the best.

I have seen good pics from all sorts of cameras, and don't put that down.

S. Shapiro

PS I wish I could see the show. I'll tell my NYC friends.

----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 9:03 PM
Subject: Krappy Kamera Show (I juried it)

> Steve S said:
> <I simplys with to add what Edward Weston said: A photograph should be
> clear, with a unity of puriety from corner to corner, edge to edge - with
> metaphor.>
> Well, I'll never claim to be a great artist or critic but when I finished
> with the 20 trays of slides I was stunned at the beauty and creativity
> displayed before me. It's not often that photographs move me so, but I
> gotta tell ya, I had tears in my eyes when I sat and enjoyed the winning
> entries.
> Maybe Weston should have said that "a photograph should be GOOD." (And
> what the dickens is "unity of purity" anyway? Sheesh.) Lord knows we have
> way too many perfectly sharp photographs that could bore the flies off a
> turd.
> Try to see the Krappy Kamera show at SOHO Gallery when it opens in March
> if you have a chance!
> Dan
Received on Mon Jan 10 01:44:10 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 02/01/05-09:28:07 AM Z CST