Category: overnight notes

Steichen: One Picture

Posted on Posted in book shelf, Criticism, on photographers, overnight notes

Clement Greenberg reviewed Steichen’s “A Life in Photography.” [1964] and wasn’t impressed… only one photography was worthwhile: the 1921 Dancer’s Hands.

“one wonders at what must have been the lack of a capacity for self-criticism that let Steichen abandon the straightforwardness of these (early) works..”

Clement Greenberg reviewed Steichen’s “A Life in Photography.” [1964] and wasn’t impressed… only one photography was worthwhile: the 1921 Dancer’s Hands. Saying: “..nicely composed … would be artistically inert were it not for what the woman’s arms evoke of attractive femaleness…”

“Photography’s advantage over painting… the enormously greater ease and speed with which it achieves realism. This speed and ease have radically expanded the literary possibilities of pictorial art.”

The windblown “Wind Fire” image is of a student. It strikes me as being one flavor of the terpsichorean image of John Wimberley (a key person in the revival of pyro negatives)

Terpsichorean pose

Sources:
https://www.academia.edu/30974476/Footprints_on_stone._An_outline_of_Isadora_Duncan_presence_today
http://www.artnet.com/artists/edward-steichen/
https://www.christies.com/lotfinder/Lot/edward-steichen-1879-1973-wind-fire-therese-5972040-details.aspx
https://huxleyparlour.com/artists/edward-steichen/
https://isadoraduncan.org/foundation/isadora-duncan/
http://www.isadoraduncanarchive.org/dancer/3/


https://www.theartstory.org/artist/steichen-edward/artworks/
https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/california/articles/ladies-we-love-isadora-duncan/

january birthdays

Posted on Posted in overnight notes

Alfred Stieglitz January 1, 1864
Wilson Hegoda January 8, 1915
Garry Winogrand January 14, 1928
Cecil Beaton January 14, 1904
Andreas Gursky January 15, 1955
Cindy Sherman January 19, 1954
Joyce Neimanas January 22, 1944

overnights: 12.21.22

Posted on Posted in big bits, overnight notes, the fora

another day of snobby hobbies in which they trump each others experience with their theory. basically, they complain that they weren’t consulted before the person proceeded to built something. Too bad the builder showed it on their net-forum. I understand the builder was proud. Bringing back their memories of 60 years ago. Even, perhaps, routing traffic to their YouTube Channel.

who knows… motives always are overlapping functions.

another sample: an original Lomo effect –edge fog, light leaks during exposure of the plastic back camera. Film fog on edges, making fingers of light, flare of plastic lens, over-exposed highlights — all these. This is the fundamental of the school of making do with the basic camera to learn to see without the camera– that was part of the Diana age that was recovered in the Lomo revival of film. The imperfection as affirmation of something other.

Anyhow, the amateur cameras and chemical club sees these as chemical effects. So be it. They have discovered brush development. Ferricyanide (oh my, that is dangerous they opine; they fear — too bad they don’t know)

Too bad they don’t know Eugene Smith, along with many others, used overprinting and bleach back regularly. Chapters in books; handouts from Emulsion Companies.

As well: perpetual need to make pigment prints with partial knowledge.

Notice the ongoing threads: partial knowledge, gathered together to support and sustain a dominate opinion. Reads like talk-radio. 

try before deny
/ koraks and the soft brag
they know more than they do
seeing the way of film

... ektar /photrio thread\\\ granting permission from the back office of soft woods
Well, you're not too hot on electrical engineering, and I happen to have no interest in sports, so I think we can call it even.

Improvement:
https://www.quora.com/How-does-a-single-LED-light-glow-in-multiple-colours
A Study on the Alternative Process for the Toxicity Print: of Gum Bichromate 4-Color Gelatin Pigment Process using DAS