Re: [Leica] E******* WAS sherman

[S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net>]

Those people do not do their own printing. The toughest part of their job is to
find parking at the lab. I've heard, and seen instances, where the "artist"
will hire a photographer to do the camera work . The "artist" would then do
heavy art directing with pre and post production manipulation. Hell, I have a
wood cut, 3'x4' in my living room from such an experience. An NEA project, with
the work done strictly from my slides, compositionally, etc. Nary a word of a
photographer's collaboration. I was part of the production expenses in the
grant proposal.  At least I used my Leica.

Slobodan Dimitrov


Johnny Deadman wrote:

> on 13/12/00 10:42 am, Nathan Wajsman at belgiangator@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > The format used by Sherman and Eggleston makes no
> > difference whatsoever to me. In fact, I do not even
> > know or care what equipment they use. I simply find
> > their work (at least what I have seen of it) devoid of
> > any artistic or technical merit. In other words, I
> > have no idea what they are trying to say, and I find
> > their pictures poorly executed from a technique point
> > of view. This is in contrast to what I feel about
> > Mapplethorpe: while I am sometimes repulsed by some of
> > the content, I greatly admire the technical quality of
> > his pictures. I have seen them in several exhibitions,
> > and the richness of the prints is astounding.
>
> Fair enough, but that surprises me about the technique thing. Have you ever
> seen Sherman or Eggleston's prints? Both of them are technically quite
> astounding. Eggleston's in particular because of his use of the dye transfer
> technique. Quite likely to fry your eyeballs.
> --
> Johnny Deadman
>
> http://www.pinkheadedbug.com