Re: Comments please?

From: Katharine Thayer ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 07/22/05-02:20:59 AM Z
Message-id: <42E0AC63.140A@pacifier.com>

Kate M wrote:
>
> Hi Katherine, thanks for the feedback. These are part of my master's
> work (ongoing). Yes, perhaps the 1/2 should read 1 of 2.

That part I understood, but I was having trouble reconciling 1/2 with
"Unique state print."

This is a way
> the Aussies have of categorising prints that have no exact duplicates,
> but are part of a quasi-edition. Good, not good????

Interesting. I wouldn't say good or not good, since I'm not real up on
numbering editions, but thanks for clarification.

> I'd like to see yours when you have it scanned.

http://www.pacifier.com/~kthayer/html/untitled.html

See, totally different effect. It just occurred to me that what I'm
really after here is an overall stain over the image; maybe what I
should be working toward is pigment stain rather than printed tone. I'm
trying to achieve a look that harkens back to a certain kind of
pictorialist look, and I think actually a lot of pictorialist work owes
its charm to pigment stain. At any rate I had to make three negatives
before I got one thin enough to allow the depth of tone I wanted on the
highlights, so there are a lot of layers underneath where the highlights
came out too light. It always amazes me how many different ways there
are to get to a particular effect in gum.

Katharine

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Katharine Thayer [mailto:kthayer@pacifier.com]
> Sent: Friday, 22 July 2005 9:55 a.m.
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: Re: Comments please?
>
> Kate M wrote:
> >
> > Hi, I've just posted some new images on my site
> > http://www.katemahoneyphoto.co.nz/Close2u_intro.htm
> > I would like some feedback - any comments gracefully and gratefully
> > accepted :)
> >
>
> I like 'em, Kate.
>
> It looks like we're on some kind of parallel path, because I'm doing a
> series based on a similar kind of idea. Mine are 10-minute pinhole
> exposures, so much blurrier and no detail, and not quite as close up,
> and printed rather low-key and low-contrast, so the approaches are quite
> different. The only similarity, I guess, is that mine are also sort of
> ambiguous compositions based on the body. I've got one here in front of
> me to scan, maybe I'll do that for comparison. Anyway, I like what
> you're doing.
>
> But I'm confused what is meant by "Unique State print, 1/2" ?
>
> Katharine
>
> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.16/50 - Release Date:
> 15/07/2005
>
>
> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.16/50 - Release Date:
> 15/07/2005
>
Received on Fri Jul 22 09:16:40 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/25/05-05:31:52 PM Z CST