Latent images as conceptual art

I have bleached latent images -- maybe I should not have developed them. Perhaps manipulated latent images are worth more than straight latent images?

garry winogrand i think left 10,000 rolls of unprocessed film ...

i don't think much deserves to be permanent ... unless it is on the internet

sounds like a good art exhibit ...
just filmholders and spooled film
leaving it to the imagination of the viewer
what they may or may not be looking at ...

retina and other unstable images would be perfect for this, seeing they
decompose / are destroyed the moment they are made

great thread cliveh !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh

Schroedinger's cat.

---

Well played EvH!

This whole topic reminds me of what Piero Manzoni was trying to get across

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piero_Manzoni

I think we should just sell sheet metal and rubber stock to people instead of finished cars, so they can imagine themselves driving a car that isn't complete. That would be great value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch

Johannes Brahms was always his own severest critic. When he knew he would soon die, he destroyed all but a very few of his unpublished manuscripts. He did this to ensure that he would be known for only his best work. Other artists have done the same thing. In most cases the fact that films were never developed indicates that the photographer did not believe they contained any memorable images.

---

And I think Brahms was right in doing that too. It shouldn't have to be that way, but unfortunately there has always been the foolish tendency to try finish what was left unfinished. Mahler, Bruckner and others have been victims of this sort of stupidity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jnanian

garry winogrand i think left 10,000 rolls of unprocessed film ...

i don't think much deserves to be permanent ... unless it is on the internet

sounds like a good art exhibit ...
just filmholders and spooled film
leaving it to the imagination of the viewer
what they may or may not be looking at ...

retina and other unstable images would be perfect for this, seeing they
decompose / are destroyed the moment they are made

great thread cliveh !!

---

Sounds more like an emotional issue than photography.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lxdude

Schroedinger's cat is/was a photographer?

---

You won't find out until you open the box.:p:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cliveh

You sometimes hear of well-known photographers leaving rolls or dark slides of unprocessed film after their death and I wondered if the demise of film and it’s chemical process know how, could mean that one day it maintains a special value in its latent image state? To process it may destroy the wonder of what it may behold. This may already be the case, but any thoughts?

---

I have the most incredible and magnificent images in my head that I never bothered to take pictures of, never stopped the car, never put down my beer and snapped a picture.

When I croak they should put my head on display and people can walk by and know that those images are in there, but just far too magnificent for the likes of them to see.

The greatest pictures never taken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poisson Du Jour

Bugger tugging at the forelocks of the dear departed's celluloid record. I'm taking it all with me. There will be nothing for the world to stickybeak at! :)

---

If film was still celluloid, all the negatives could be made into a bomb, to be used in a modified Viking-type funeral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh

If film was still celluloid, all the negatives could be made into a bomb, to be used in a modified Viking-type funeral.

---

or melted down to make heals for shoes like georges méliès' films