The elitist print exchange?

[Ole]

If anyone who has received a print from me would have preferred it mounted, that would indicate they think it's worth mounting. I'm not going to do it - I don't mount.

I have received prints in the exchanges which I have had mounted, matted and framed, and I have received prints which reside in the ever growing stack in the spare room. Unmounted prints take up so much less space in the stack

[jtsatterlee]

I voted no, because I do not think the items listed will improve the quality of the work. (yes i prefer FB over RC, but that is another debate isnt it?)

One of my biggest issues with print exchanges, and I have been involved in (here and other places) is the respect (or lack of) people give there own work:
- poorly packaged so it arrives damaged
- damaged somewhere in process and still sent (bent, wrinkled or even poorly processed)
- and my biggest issue - not even spotted

If I like an image I can mount it myself, there is no need for the print maker to do that, perhaps the image is excellent, but just not my taste. But sending out prints that are not even finished, with dust marks all over them is another thing.

Perhaps the question is how to teach the difference between a work print and a finished print?

[df cardwell]

Please note there is an ancient distinction between the use of the word "PICTURE" vs "PRINT".

Strand and Weston made pictures, the emphasis on the "image they made", not the materials they used to make them from nor the materials on which they were mounted or presented.

For those working in the Pictorialist tradition, for whom Presentation and Materials are equally ( or more ) important to " the image", the word Print is traditionally used, seeking to link a photograph's importance to a limited edition Lithograph, serigraph, or some other " -graph" appropriate to the rare atmosphere of their salon. And we all know that a "gelatin silver print" is more valuable than a "picture".

As for Image, while it can be a little toney in use, it simply implies "less then the subject".
.

[Marc Leest]

I voted yes, beacause presentation is almost as important as the print itself.
The only limitation, is one print however.

M.

[Dave Miller]

Who decides who participates, or more importantly; doesn’t?
Whoever was idiot enough to suggest this crackpot idea should restrict their print exchanges to themselves, using only their own prints. That way they won’t risk being offended by receiving an inferior picture, or more to the point perhaps, one that illustrates the short comings in their own work.
I thought this exchange thing was about participation, learning, teaching, friendship, and just plain old fashioned fun.
Elitism is the basis of all human misery. It sucks and doesn’t belong on this forum.

By the way, I voted against.

[gr82bart]

Whoever was idiot enough to suggest this crackpot idea should restrict their print exchanges to themselves, using only their own prints.

So far that's what they're doing. They are the ones not participating and when I asked them why? This 'quality' thing was the answer I got. There are many, many more than what the poll is indicating so far. It's the reason for me starting this thread.

Regards, Art.

[avandesande]

"I don't want to be a member of any club that would have me as a member"--was that groucho marx?

[jd callow]

What Dave said...

[Claire Senft]

I want to commend Nige for having high standards. Any dog worth owning should have a platinum poopy bag.

[Dave Miller]

What Mrcallow said.