RE: Actual photograph; was List Minders

From: Robert W. Schramm ^lt;>
Date: 03/15/05-10:24:30 PM Z
Message-id: <BAY21-F37E7CDD4DBEC7151460056D0480@phx.gbl>

Well I will add my two cents on this one as well.
If you go back to the origin of the word it means writing with light.
So, to make a photograph you need a lens or a pin hole to form an image on a
photosensitive surface so that a record can be made.
Thus a xerox is a photograph as is a silver/gelatin print or a digital

Yes, I understand that it can be argued that digital imaging is no longer
alternative process. But I think I can make a case for extremely unusual and
very creative digital images as alternative images.
It takes a lot of time and effort to truely master Adobe Photoshop and I'm
not talking about Photoshope Elements. As an example of my point. Consider
Polaroid prints. One can churn out lots of straight Polaroid prints but I
have seen manipulated Polaroid prints that I would consider alternative.

The subject of what is alternative and what is not has come up before and
the list has never agreed on a good definition. Maybe we could stick with
the idea that someone suggested i.e. we all know what is not alternative.

Bob Schramm
Check out my web page at:

&gt;From: Photogecko Austin &lt;;
&gt;Subject: Actual photograph; was List Minders
&gt;Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:43:59 -0600
&gt;Hmm. . . .
&gt;And so what is an actual photograph?
&gt;John Campbell
&gt;Photogecko Studios &amp; Gallery
&gt;1413 S. 1st Street
&gt;Austin, TX 78704
&gt;On Mar 15, 2005, at 7:41 AM, Joe Smigiel wrote:
&gt;&gt; the final outcome from that process and
&gt;&gt;light attenuator is an actual photograph.
Received on Tue Mar 15 22:24:37 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 04/08/05-09:31:01 AM Z CST