Roy My work is the MOMA and a couple other museums so I'm not to worried about what some po dunk hobbest juried show thinks. My work is currently in the APA-LA show that is going to be hanging at CHIAT DAY for the next 2 months then at Deutch for the 2 after that. Any show that would exclude work done in photoshop has ZERO clue about photo history. They would exclude Jerry Ulsemann as well right? Roy ever heard of a pen registered vacuum plate and litho masks? I used to do that for fun when I was an assistant for Michelle Tcherevkoff and he still had the equipment. Anyway here is the same place take I believe about 20 minutes early with film that has been xrayed about 6 times is 3 years old bought in Sydney Australia stored in a zip lock back in the trunk of my car and then put into a 1958 Yashimat LM Scanned ZERO RETOUCING as can be seen by the newton rings and pin hole burn throughs. http://ftp.littlemousevfx.com/trans/img043.jpg As you can see not much has change except the position of the sun.
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 8:35 PM, <PhotoRoy6@xxxxxxx> wrote:
For juried shows juried by a photographer pictures which they see as manipulated in Photoshop get kicked right on out- even if they pictures are straight shots.RoyIn a message dated 3/17/2013 3:21:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dd-b@xxxxxxxx writes:For purposes of discussion here I like to know that sort of thing. For
evaluating the image as art, it's of mild tangential interest to me. If
you'd painted it in that detail instead, what difference would that make
to me? All the really obvious differences involve using it as something
other than art (like "I should go see that for myself").
