Jen Bekman was quick to respond to my last post. After mildly and humorously berating me for my cynical attitude, she assured me that I was still on her radar and would stay there. It’s always nice to get reminders that people really are paying attention, even to those of us who have not yet “made it.” Thanks for the perspective, Jen!
I discovered yesterday that I didn’t make it to the next level with Jen Bekman. Every winter, she takes the 40 “Hotshots” from the previous years and selects 4 “Hotshot Ultras.” I wasn’t the least bit surprised to see that my name was not on her list. I was a little bummed however, that I wasn’t able to get my web updates completed before I fell off her radar. Hopefully I’ll be able to get her attention again in the future, as she is needless to say a great person to be associated with. In the meantime, I will be keeping my eye open for other opportunities on the New York scene. I have really enjoyed the various opportunities I have had to show there.
If there’s one thing my alma mater, University of New Mexico does well, it’s getting teaching jobs for its graduates. Of the classmates that I have kept up with, at least 80% of them are sitting in tenure track positions, and most found one within a year or two of graduation. Schools like SVA and Yale do an amazing job getting their graduates into galleries, but I don’t think anyone beats UNM in getting their graduates into academia.A few of my classmates/fellow academicians are also fellow bloggers:
Dennis DeHart: Blog
Myra Greene: Demo Disaster
Kathleeen Robbins: funny-peculiar: a southern photograph blog
They’re making nice work, so check out their web sites as well.
After several months, I have finally managed to find enough large blocks of time to get a few color darkroom prints that I am happy with. In comparing them to my digital prints, the results were somewhat different than I expected, but no less significant. Here’s the first (these are copy photos of the actual prints):
The first is the RA-4 print, the second is the inkjet print. The tonal mapping of the two was much more similar than I expected (as were the white and black points), but there were some significant differences that made the RA-4 print a clear winner for me:
1. Subtle differences in color- The darkroom print has better color separation overall. The reds in the dress are more true (this can of course be fixed almost instantly in Photoshop, but the RA-4 print got them right to begin with), and more importantly, the differentiation of color in the grass is much better(this is much harder to fix in Photoshop). The slight variation in color balance might account for some of this (the digital print is a bit more green), but limitations in the scanning and printing might also be to blame (I am currently doing tests to try to figure this out).
2. Difference in grain and tonal gradations. The darkroom print has a much smoother grain without much noticeable difference in sharpness. Here’s a detail to illustrate (you might have to click on the image and bring up the larger version to really see the difference):
The darkroom print has a much smoother feel overall. I am going to go back and rescan the negative with all sharpening turned off to see if that makes a difference, but I have read and heard many times that digital scans increase the appearance of grain.
Here’s a comparison of the second print I did:
Again, darkroom is first, digital second. There was a less pronounced difference between these two prints, but the darkroom print still felt “cleaner,” both in terms of color and smoothness (though the digital print retained better shadow detail).
More importantly than these differences, many of which can be corrected, in both cases I found myself going back and correcting the color of the digital print after I made the darkroom print. For some reason, it was much easier for me to get a really good print in the darkroom than in the computer, and it took a lot of fidgeting in Photoshop to bring the digital print up close to the quality of the darkroom print. Digital does offers a real advantage in terms of usability- I can work on an image for 30 minutes, come back later and work on it for another 30 minutes, unlike the darkroom which requires a minimum of several hours at a go. With my current schedule, this is a must for me. While I don’t have the time or the resources to start making all my prints in the darkroom (though I might consider doing darkroom proofs of all my color work if I had access to an automated processor- the tabletop Jobo I’m using is cumbersome), it seems my original theory concerning the usefulness of still working in the darkroom bears some merit.
I picked these two images to begin with because I thought they would make good “baseline” images- straightforward lighting and color. My next experiments will be with a few images shot in lat evening light to try and get a better sense of how different white points affect things. All I need is more 4 hour blocks of time and more chemistry… I’ll of course report my findings once I have them.
It was just pointed out me that I had my facts completely wrong in my last post on Critical Mass. For some reason I was thinking that only 50 people made it through the first round of critical mass, when in fact it is 150. That brings the odds down to 1 in 3.8- much more reasonably (Odds of getting the book award are still the same as in my last post). However, having your work really stand out among the 150 chosen becomes a bit harder…
There is a silver lining to this that I forgot to mention in my last post. All entrants will get copies of the books from last years winners, as well as a CD containing the work of all entrants. I’m excited to see the books, but the CD is even more instructive, as it will allow entrants to see their work in the context of all who entered, which in my experience provides excellent feedback, and maybe a better sense of why your work was or wasn’t chosen. Little pieces of insight like that, while sometimes demoralizing (back to my comment about the amount of great unrecognized work there is out there), ultimately make us better at what we do. I am happy that Critical Mass is able to build that feedback into the system, as most juried endeavors don’t do that.
In a recent post about Tim Atherton’s blog and work, I complained that I was unable to select my favorites from his portfolio due to the fact that the site was done in Flash. Tim was nice enough to point out a feature I missed that allowed me to pull up jpeg’s of his images, so here’s a recap of what in my humble opinion are some of his best:
From “Traces”
From “Immersive Landscapes”:
My sincere thanks to whomever nominated me for PDN30. What a great opportunity. While I have some suspicions as to who might be responsible (it almost certainly wasn’t the staff at PDN), I have nothing concrete to go on, so I am posting a open thank you. I’ll will of course post any news I hear relating to the competition. I have several posts in the works, so look an increase in activity this week on my blog.
This news is about 10 days old, which is almost an eternity in blog time, but is still worth mentioning. I’m talking about Tim Atherton’s post about my work on his blog Muse-ings.I’ve been reading Tim’s blog for a while now and have been really enjoying it. His posts are thoughtful and well written, and he tackles interesting ideas.His work is worth checking out as well- he’s got a good eye for the “banal,” and his compositions are quite enjoyable. I’ve included a few here, though wasn’t able to post some of my favorites due to the fact that his site is done in Flash.
I participated in a group show that opened last Firday at the Detroit Industrial Project. Doing so much of my exhibiting (so much is of course a relative term) long distance, it is really nice to participate in a local show with other close artist friends. The comraderie reminds of why I became an artist in the first place- the bonding that happens as we all try to put finishing touches on things with minutes to go before the opening is priceless.
I was showing my digital work (including 2 new pieces) that is always a favorite of my painter/scultor friends but hasn’t generated much interest in the photo world.
Brian Widdis wrote a nice review of my work on his blog The Way hings Are. Thanks Brian!
You can also check out some of Brian’s work here.