Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,727   Posts: 1,515,134   Online: 1109
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 33 of 33
  1. #31
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,155
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by stillsilver View Post
    I saw an EW exhibition at the SF MOMA 7 or 8 years ago. It too was dimly lit. But the prints were still outstanding.
    Made my stuff look like garbage. I've sharpend my eye and been more critical of my prints since then.

    Mike
    It really is an outrage how they light some of these shows. The prints spend most of their time in complete darkness so a few more lumens every decade or so when they're mounted in a show is not going to make much archival difference. I don't understand why these curators get so locked up on light damage.
    Jim

  2. #32
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,780
    There really isn't a mechanism that can truly duplicate a large format contact print into any other medium. This is fully realized when you see a good one in person.

    As far as if a reproduction matters or not, I view a print by a master such as EW as I would view any work of art. Even if you could exactly duplicate it, it isn't the original, anymore than a perfect reproduction of any other artwork could be.

  3. #33
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,389
    Quote Originally Posted by c6h6o3 View Post
    It really is an outrage how they light some of these shows. The prints spend most of their time in complete darkness so a few more lumens every decade or so when they're mounted in a show is not going to make much archival difference. I don't understand why these curators get so locked up on light damage.
    Yeah, it really is the triumph of the conservator over the artist. These standards have become highly disseminated and rigid. Since most of these larger touring shows are made up of works loaned from numerous other institutions and individuals the loan agreements stipulate the light levels so even if the host curator would like to do otherwise, they cannot. Like it or not, artwork is seen as an investment so when the experts say this is what you have to do to protect it, you do it. I work in a museum, we have Westons in the collection in fact, and when you consider how the artists themselves would like to view their own work, it does get to you. I feel the same. The best thing to do is to give your eyes time to adjust. Maybe improvements in Museum glass will allow light levels to go back up someday.

    Not to make you guys jealous or anything, but it's pretty great to be able to lift the mat on a Weston, (or Siskind etc.) and see the whole object, sometimes literally in your own hands. Nothing like the real thing indeed.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin