Loud Past

Posted on Posted in babl, da net, dumbo, morning wood

yes, in deedee… from someone seemingly informed by nostalgia rather than knowledge. Those one-hours were called “hot-heads,” or “crab-shacks” by the owners, employees — the people who had to man and manage them. They were so hot people didn’t wear underwear.. they stunk so much, malls didn’t want them near food or clothing. That’s why the idea of the booth in the parking lot took off… a solution to polution.

Loud Loui on the forum for forgettings

such a furor. a broken machine and a small time lab is distressed. Perhaps destroyed.

This leads us to the fantastic pastime of remembering past times. Even if those aren’t your experiences to own, you will make claims… they provide you with special views; special privileges.

The reality of the revival… it is in 35mm roll film. Mostly a thing of color. Mostly to be scanned. And the big bounce thing, that birthday of renewed interest: it depends upon cities with twenty-somethings re-iterating their parents. The typical number of rolls shot is less than 20 per user, after which they look for someone to buy their camera.

Oh, they never put aside the digital kit. Actually, old digital point and shoots are the current, 2022/23 sales impulse. 2004 is the new fad, not 1984.

Picture Post:

Posted on Posted in overnight notes, picture post

from process folder…

What are the methods of abstraction. How much is usable. We each find that out, leaving in and tossing out. After many years of finding my ways, I no longer ask others directions.

I do like to see what others make… interaction over time with a variety of contradictory texts is my preferred method of making a map meaningful. It is difficult to avoid the pretty.

Was a time when i did these as dye transfers… then as C-prints… then as gum prints.

Forum Follies

Posted on Posted in as written, the fora, the metaTagged , , 3 Comments

The take away is more than one, you say. What do forums do… they seem to wonder what they do well; paticularly after they’ve been running a long time. Even the simple questions lead to toxic shock.

Summary: You can’t talk about the meaning, nor the nature of photography. You also can’t see it on the internet, therefore, you are wasting your time and their bandwidth showing pictures on the web. Further, talking tech is pretty much wasted since you can’t tell what the pictures will look like. Even worse, you don’t know if the person offering their instruction is capable of anything other than web boasting. The circle seems complete. Actually, it seems like a spiral. Smaller and smaller.

So, you can offer to buy and sell. That, at least is about as far as we’ve gotten. Except, how do you trust in this circle. After all we can’t know if the words or the pictures of the items are correct either. Do we?

crits are tough. they do require shared language. not necessarily what can be brought from experience as an insurance inspector.

—

Note Mr Katz’s sig asserts his presence on the forum has been since 2008. Membership claims have meaning beyond the factoid they’d seem to have.

They hold desire, and need to belong. Why else would he return.

trust the print, if you have seen it.

web should display what print showed from trusted source

only way to know is to know ahead.

shades of communication theory and post-modern death

perhaps they are headed to a post-forum internet.

Which leads me to a wayback time. Laura Gilpin asked CCA to match a color litho that had been made of her “Rainbow” — it, of course couldn’t be done as a type-C. It would have been very difficult to do as a dye-transfer. One form doesn’t complete an image, nor does it make it less useful.

Gilpin: Rainbow. Amon Carter attempts to show the print. Greyscale on side provides uniform meter for those who try.

“The proof print we sent you of the rainbow more closely matches your original than the litho does.” [12/68]

Even her original wasn’t what she wanted after seeing what a lithographer could/had done with the image.