There is an article in the current New York Times online which discusses
the issues of digital vs silver. I've attached the beginning of the
article. You will need to go to the NY Times site to read the article in
full. I would be interested to read your responses to this.
- Serena (a former lurker)
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/arts/design/25evan.html
"Walker Evans. Or Is It?
By MICHAEL KIMMELMAN
Published: August 25, 2006
A PHOTOGRAPHER snaps a picture. If it’s a camera with film, a negative
is made; if it’s a digital camera, a file is produced. A printer, in a
dark room using chemicals, or at a computer screen, can tinker with the
image, crop it, enlarge it, make it lighter or darker, highlight one
part or obscure another.
Digitally produced prints of classic photographs by Walker Evans, among
them “Roadside Stand Near Birmingham” (1936), are now on display at the
UBS Art Gallery in New York, raising some basic issues about the nature
of photography.
In other words, the image produced by the camera, whether it’s a
negative or a digital file, is only the matrix for the work of art. It
is not the work itself, although if the photographer is a journalist,
any hanky-panky in the printing process comes at the potential cost of
the picture’s integrity. Digital technology has not introduced
manipulation into this universe; it has only multiplied the
opportunities for mischief. "
--
-|-><-|-^-^-|-><-|-^-^-|-><-|-^-^-|-><-|-^-^-|-><-|-
Serena Fenton http://layersofmeaning.org/
fents@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.ibiblio.org/fents/
- + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
