John H. Rodgers on tue 9 sep 97
-- [ From: John H. Rodgers * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
More on this thread. I found in my own work that it was often necessary to
make a soft-light box to control the harsh glare that produces sharp glaring
reflections. I have used cheesecloth, old sheets, baby diapers (cloth type).
Any translucent material probably will work. Build a box, one side open,
drape or attach the translucent material, put in your pot, position your
lights around the outside and over the top so as to get the best lighting,
lighter areas contrasted by shadows. The diffusion of the light by the box
should rid you of most of your glare and reflections.
On the subject of reflections, sometimes they are very desirable. One of
the most beautiful pictures of pottery I have seen was of a very nicely
done piece by an Alaskan potter. The pot had a perfect reflection of an open
window, with curtains at the side, and trees and mountains in the distance.
The reflection enhanced the beauty of the pot enormously.
John Rodgers
Saic1984@AOL.COM on sat 10 jun 00
Top is when you look at a sheet of slides
Andr=E9
Chicago
PS Red dot should appear at top right when loading into a projector (upside=20
down).
vince pitelka on sat 10 jun 00
> Okay, I think this falls into the silly question category, but I need to
> know...When labeling slides for juries, most of them want you to label
> the "Top" of the slide. Does this mean the top as you look at the slide
> with your naked eye, or the top as it would be in a slide projector
> (i.e., upside down)?
Di -
As we are fond of saying on Clayart, the only silly or stupid question is
the one that does not get asked at all. When you label the "top" of a
slide, it is as you are looking at the image right-side-up when holding it
up to the light.
It used to be that everyone put a red dot on the lower left corner of the
slide when it is held as indicated above. That way, when someone turned the
slide over and held it by the red dot it would be ready to lower into the
slide tray. Not many people do this any more, but I do.
Another thing to think about when labeling slides or when loading a
carousel - be sure to have the proper side facing the screen. Many slide
mounts say "this side towards screen" and you should always be sure to put
the labeling on the other side - the front of the slide. If there is no
indication, then the emulsion side always faces the screen - the emulsion
side will be slightly less shiny than the front surface of the slide. This
is critical, because if a slide is put in with the wrong side facing the
screen, it will be slightly out of focus.
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Home - vpitelka@dekalb.net
615/597-5376
Work - wpitelka@tntech.edu
615/597-6801 ext. 111, fax 615/597-6803
Appalachian Center for Crafts
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
http://www.craftcenter.tntech.edu/
Andie on sat 10 jun 00
I am just so thankful that someone asked this. It's been on my list of
"questions I'm embarrassed to ask" for months.
: ) Andie
EMAIL: andie@princessco.com
OFFICIAL HOMEPAGE: www.andie.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Diane G. Echlin
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Date: Saturday, June 10, 2000 5:34 PM
Subject: slides
>Okay, I think this falls into the silly question category, but I need to
>know...When labeling slides for juries, most of them want you to label
>the "Top" of the slide. Does this mean the top as you look at the slide
>with your naked eye, or the top as it would be in a slide projector
>(i.e., upside down)?
>Thank you in advance for your help!
>Di
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
___
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Diane G. Echlin on sat 10 jun 00
Okay, I think this falls into the silly question category, but I need to
know...When labeling slides for juries, most of them want you to label
the "Top" of the slide. Does this mean the top as you look at the slide
with your naked eye, or the top as it would be in a slide projector
(i.e., upside down)?
Thank you in advance for your help!
Di
Diane G. Echlin on sun 11 jun 00
Thank you, Vince, and others, for the clear explanations for preparing slides. I
really appreciate it, and now I will feel confident when submitting my soon to be
slides!
Di
vince pitelka wrote:
> > Okay, I think this falls into the silly question category, but I need to
> > know...When labeling slides for juries, most of them want you to label
> > the "Top" of the slide. Does this mean the top as you look at the slide
> > with your naked eye, or the top as it would be in a slide projector
> > (i.e., upside down)?
>
> Di -
> As we are fond of saying on Clayart, the only silly or stupid question is
> the one that does not get asked at all. When you label the "top" of a
> slide, it is as you are looking at the image right-side-up when holding it
> up to the light.
>
> It used to be that everyone put a red dot on the lower left corner of the
> slide when it is held as indicated above. That way, when someone turned the
> slide over and held it by the red dot it would be ready to lower into the
> slide tray. Not many people do this any more, but I do.
>
> Another thing to think about when labeling slides or when loading a
> carousel - be sure to have the proper side facing the screen. Many slide
> mounts say "this side towards screen" and you should always be sure to put
> the labeling on the other side - the front of the slide. If there is no
> indication, then the emulsion side always faces the screen - the emulsion
> side will be slightly less shiny than the front surface of the slide. This
> is critical, because if a slide is put in with the wrong side facing the
> screen, it will be slightly out of focus.
> Best wishes -
> - Vince
>
> Vince Pitelka
> Home - vpitelka@dekalb.net
> 615/597-5376
> Work - wpitelka@tntech.edu
> 615/597-6801 ext. 111, fax 615/597-6803
> Appalachian Center for Crafts
> Tennessee Technological University
> 1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
> http://www.craftcenter.tntech.edu/
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
Snail Scott on mon 29 jan 01
At 03:54 PM 1/29/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Hello all, I am asking about grad school stuff again. Sorry. I was wondering
>what a ball park figure is for professionally photographed slides. I am a
>poor elementary school teacher and don't have alot of extra funds.
>BUT...everyone insists that professional slided are a must. What do you know
>about pricing per slide? Thanks- Amy Machen in sunny, WARM FLORIDA!
I have paid photographers from $50 to $85
per hour. (The difference in price has nearly
always been commensurate with the difference
in quality.) They will generally shoot one
roll of film. If it's small stuff with
only one view needed (e.g. most pots) they will
generally bracket the exposure, but can shoot
a dozen pots to a roll in an hour's time. If
it's large, cumbersome stuff, like big
sculpture, they may only shoot one piece,
since moving it around without trashing the
backdrop takes time, and so does refocusing
for each angle and detail.
Most photographers will charge by the hour or
by the roll, depending on the job and their
preference; they don't usually do 'per slide'.
(4x5 transparencies, which some ad printers
prefer, are shot one at a time, however.)
Unless you need that format, though, just get
slides.
If you make average-sized pots that will all look
good against the same backdrop, have a bunch shot
in one session, one after the other...much more
economical than separate shoots.
I use a professional for my ads, but since my
work is of the large inconvenient sort, I shoot
everything else myself. It's not an impossible
skill to learn, and $250 will get you an adequate
camera and lighting, if you shop cheap. I've got
plenty of pieces that were never good enough to
warrant a professional photo, but which I'm
glad to have documentation of, just the same.
-Snail
Carissa Doying on mon 29 jan 01
Hi Amy.
This is where you begin to be the resourceful, proactive grad student. Good
slides can be had for anywhere between $10 and $25/slide. Of course, you
can pay a lot more. However, if you look you can find a just starting out
photographer who will work with you. For example, somebody with a new
business in town or a recent photo graduate of your local university or ask
at a gallery that shows photographers, or call some ceramicists ask them who
they use.
Most any photographer will be willing to shoot your slides but not all
understand the nuances of shooting 3D work. Show them a copy of Ceramics
Monthly. Have them use a gradient, neutral paper or better yet, hang
neutral grey paper about fifteen feet behind a table and bring it across the
top of the table and drape it down the front. Take great care not to bend
or crease the paper. T30 or T60 film and never anything over 100; so they
will be using a tripod. Make sure they use light diffusers to avoid those
glaring hotspots on shiny glazes. You know the best lines of your work.
Take part in arranging and composing the shot. Fill the frame or you will
end up taping later. Most importantly, bracket each shot up and down. It's
best to view the projected image to make a final choice but you will
probably have to settle for a light box. When in doubt between two shots of
the same image go with the lighter one. You can get dupes made in quantity
for around .50 cents each, give or take.
Good luck to you. Oh, and Amy...if you think you are poor now, wait until
grad school! The good thing is one is so immersed in the work it will
hardly matter.
Carissa
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
AMY MACHEN on mon 29 jan 01
Hello all, I am asking about grad school stuff again. Sorry. I was wondering
what a ball park figure is for professionally photographed slides. I am a
poor elementary school teacher and don't have alot of extra funds.
BUT...everyone insists that professional slided are a must. What do you know
about pricing per slide? Thanks- Amy Machen in sunny, WARM FLORIDA!
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Hilda on mon 29 jan 01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Hank Murrow wrote:
> >Hello all, I am asking about grad school stuff again. Sorry. I was wondering
> >what a ball park figure is for professionally photographed slides. I am a
> >poor elementary school teacher and don't have alot of extra funds.
> >BUT...everyone insists that professional slided are a must. What do you know
> >about pricing per slide? Thanks- Amy Machen in sunny, WARM FLORIDA!
>
>
> Amy;
>
> I had some professional slides done recently and he charged $283
> for twelve setups. I got the five bracketed slides and a set of three
> bracketed slides, yielding two sets of perfect original exposures of twelve
> setups. This was 35mm slides.
>
I'm shocked... Last time I had slides done it was $10 per. On the advice
of a friend, I called around to the pro labs color labs in San Francisco.
It took me 20+ phone calls to find one with the correct set up This was
for photographing oil paintings - which tend to more difficult due to the
size. You want a lab with a fixed mount camera. These can photograph
anything. The one I found would do any painting up to 4'X 6' for the same
10 bucks. They then give you one original slide that is masked correctly -
in case you have a painting that is not the same diminsions as the slide
frame. You can order additional originals at the same time or copies of
the one original. As this one lab does a trememdous amount of
photographing artwork, they were very well organised at caring for it as
it was received, photographed and tehn returned.
I used them for 5 years without complaint. I have since just moved and
will be looking for another one here. What I've learned through the
grapevine is that there is a place like this in most major cities. The
alternative is doing it yourself or having a professional photographer
come out and do it at your studio - always MUCH more expensive and I don't
think the quality is as good.
Hilda Wagner
www.primenet.com/~swans
Hank Murrow on mon 29 jan 01
>Hello all, I am asking about grad school stuff again. Sorry. I was wondering
>what a ball park figure is for professionally photographed slides. I am a
>poor elementary school teacher and don't have alot of extra funds.
>BUT...everyone insists that professional slided are a must. What do you know
>about pricing per slide? Thanks- Amy Machen in sunny, WARM FLORIDA!
Amy;
I had some professional slides done recently and he charged $283
for twelve setups. I got the five bracketed slides and a set of three
bracketed slides, yielding two sets of perfect original exposures of twelve
setups. This was 35mm slides.
Hank in Eugene
Hank Murrow on tue 30 jan 01
Hilda Wagner wrote;
> I'm shocked... Last time I had slides done it was $10 per. On the advice
>of a friend, I called around to the pro labs color labs in San Francisco.
>It took me 20+ phone calls to find one with the correct set up This was
>for photographing oil paintings - which tend to more difficult due to the
>size. You want a lab with a fixed mount camera. These can photograph
>anything. The one I found would do any painting up to 4'X 6' for the same
>10 bucks. They then give you one original slide that is masked correctly -
>in case you have a painting that is not the same diminsions as the slide
>frame. You can order additional originals at the same time or copies of
>the one original. As this one lab does a trememdous amount of
>photographing artwork, they were very well organised at caring for it as
>it was received, photographed and tehn returned.
>
>I used them for 5 years without complaint. I have since just moved and
>will be looking for another one here. What I've learned through the
>grapevine is that there is a place like this in most major cities. The
>alternative is doing it yourself or having a professional photographer
>come out and do it at your studio - always MUCH more expensive and I don't
>think the quality is as good.
dear Hilda;
The price of $283 for two sets of twelve original slides was for
twelve set-ups involving up to five small pieces or one large piece. This
involved setting up the pieces on a stage with very elaborate lighting and
special nonglare coatings to get rid of the shiny spots, Each set-up (with
me helping) took about 30 minutes to get the lighting even and eliminate
bad shadows. It was done in the University of Oregon Art Museum after hours
by their staff photog. He did great work, and I got in the first three
shows I entered after having these slides made.
What you say is true for flat art, but quite wrong for three-D artwork. It
takes a much more elaborate set-up for 3D. Hope this clarifies the
situation for potters.
Regards, Hank in Eugene
Jeff Campana on tue 30 jan 01
Though this is all good advice, I want to add a bit.
I recently learned to shoot good slides. It took about 5 rolls of professional
film, so 60 bucks, plus the 350 or so dollars worth of photography equipment. I
think, for anyone serious enough to go to grad school, this is a definite skill to
learn. Thankfully I still have 2.5 years before I graduate and have to attempt to
get into grad school, but already I shoot every peice that comes out of the kiln.
After losing my entire inventory in a pottery festival windgust mishap, I am much
more careful. I now box up every pot right from the kiln, and then when I have 25
or so, I shoot two rolls. I take three shots, and put one of each pot in a
safe-deposit box, then use the others for shows, website, etc.
In the current time crunch, don't scrimp, as these slides will determine whether
you get in or not. Get a good photographer, but after this, I really suggest
getting the stuff and learning to shoot your own stuff. It will be more
convenient and much cheaper!
Here's an excellent book on that subject: The Artist's Handbook For Photographing
Their Own Artwork By John White. Check it out everyone!
Best of luck,
Jeff Campana
Snail Scott wrote:
> At 03:54 PM 1/29/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hello all, I am asking about grad school stuff again. Sorry. I was wondering
> >what a ball park figure is for professionally photographed slides. I am a
> >poor elementary school teacher and don't have alot of extra funds.
> >BUT...everyone insists that professional slided are a must. What do you know
> >about pricing per slide? Thanks- Amy Machen in sunny, WARM FLORIDA!
>
> I have paid photographers from $50 to $85
> per hour. (The difference in price has nearly
> always been commensurate with the difference
> in quality.) They will generally shoot one
> roll of film. If it's small stuff with
> only one view needed (e.g. most pots) they will
> generally bracket the exposure, but can shoot
> a dozen pots to a roll in an hour's time. If
> it's large, cumbersome stuff, like big
> sculpture, they may only shoot one piece,
> since moving it around without trashing the
> backdrop takes time, and so does refocusing
> for each angle and detail.
> If you make average-sized pots that will all look
> good against the same backdrop, have a bunch shot
> in one session, one after the other...much more
> economical than separate shoots.
>
> I use a professional for my ads, but since my
> work is of the large inconvenient sort, I shoot
> everything else myself. It's not an impossible
> skill to learn, and $250 will get you an adequate
> camera and lighting, if you shop cheap. I've got
> plenty of pieces that were never good enough to
> warrant a professional photo, but which I'm
> glad to have documentation of, just the same.
>
> -Snail
>
Diane Echlin on tue 30 jan 01
Perhaps you could find a photographer who is open to a partial payment/barter
transaction: pay with cash and pots. Perfectly legal and it might ease the
financial burden
Diane in CT
Hank Murrow wrote:
> >Hello all, I am asking about grad school stuff again. Sorry. I was wondering
> >what a ball park figure is for professionally photographed slides. I am a
> >poor elementary school teacher and don't have alot of extra funds.
> >BUT...everyone insists that professional slided are a must. What do you know
> >about pricing per slide? Thanks- Amy Machen in sunny, WARM FLORIDA!
>
> Amy;
>
> I had some professional slides done recently and he charged $283
> for twelve setups. I got the five bracketed slides and a set of three
> bracketed slides, yielding two sets of perfect original exposures of twelve
> setups. This was 35mm slides.
>
> Hank in Eugene
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
Steven Branfman on sat 3 feb 01
Friends,
Every visual artist should learn to take their own slides. Be realistic
though and don't expect to do it as well as a professional who specializes in
3-D product photograpy. Can you do it as well as some "professionals"? Sure.
But can you do it as well as you can make pots? If you can it probably says
less about your pots than it says more about your photography! I learned to
shoot slides very early in my career not as a substitute for professional
quality slides when I needed them but for everyday photographic record
keeping of my work and for reproduction (in mags or other formats), portfolio
presentation, juries, and other applications for which the quality of my
photography was acceptable. If I had to pay a professional every time I
needed decent slides I'd be well into the poor house.
If you do hire the services of a professional look carefully at their
portfolio and pay very close attention to the dimensional quality of the
photos of 3-D work that you see. With the proper film, lighting, and
exposure, anyone can achieve accurate color, but it takes a consumate
professional with lots of experience to communicate realistic volume and
dimension through their slides.
If you want to learn how to take photos of your work there are two books
available: "Photographing Your Craftwork" and "Small Scale Photography". The
latter is a combination book and video. The book "Artists Handbook For
Photographing Your Artwork" is out of print.
Steven Branfman
The Potters Shop
31 Thorpe Rd.
Needham MA 02494, USA
781 449 7687
fax: 781 449 9098
Richard Mahaffey on sun 7 apr 02
Vince, Richard, & Snail,
First and foremost follow the directions on the entry form. You would
be surprised how many entrants fail to follow the directions.
I would include a detail slide only if it is asked for. I do recommend
that you find out the make up of the jury if possible. If there are
many ceramics experts then I would choose the detail slide accordingly
(insert your philosophy here). I think the strongest slide is the one
that I would use. When one juries by slide, it is after all a photo
contest, as well as, a contest of work. A slide that is too dark, or
out of focus will do you no good and most likely much harm.
ACC shows, for example, have craftspeople who work in different media,
as well as, gallery and shop owners on the jury. In that case I would
never send a detail slide if it was not asked for. Your five slides
are up for only a very short time. You need to make an impact now! If
you use a detail shot you are at a 20% deficit from the start. The
jurors may think that you only have four good slides, not a good thing.
I, personally would not use different firing techniques if they look too
different, you will lose impact that way, and the jurors will think that
you do not have a direction.
Being on a jury for a show is a difficult job and when it comes to
finding who should be in and who should be out of a show the top 10 % is
easy as is the bottom 10%. Then the work begins. You look for
anything that separates the other 80 %. Having been a juror a few times
I find you look for things that tell you that and entry is weaker. The
worst part is that when you just squeak in or just miss, no one tells
you so it is difficult to learn if you need to improve your philosophy
or quality of your entries.
The above is my opinion, and I carry a 950 batting average for ACC and
various regional shows (Fairs).
of course as always YMMV
Rick Mahaffey
Tacoma Community College
Tacoma, Washington, USA
Richard Aerni on mon 8 apr 02
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Mahaffey" <
> Vince, Richard, & Snail,
>
> First and foremost follow the directions on the entry form. You would
> be surprised how many entrants fail to follow the directions.
>
> I would include a detail slide only if it is asked for. I do recommend
> that you find out the make up of the jury if possible. If there are
> many ceramics experts then I would choose the detail slide accordingly
> (insert your philosophy here). I think the strongest slide is the one
> that I would use. When one juries by slide, it is after all a photo
> contest, as well as, a contest of work
Rick,
You offer much good advice. So has Vince, Snail, and myself, for that
matter. People should ALWAYS put in good slides, ones that represent their
strongest work, try to pre-evaluate what the jurors' bias is, etc. Good
common sense advice...
But in the end, that which gets you into the show is the best advice to
follow. And you only learn what that is by trying, and sending in lots of
applications to lots of shows. And sometimes, what gets you into one show
doesn't get you into the next five. I've been applying to juried shows
for nearly 25 years now. Done hundreds of applications. Batting average
here, over the years, is pretty good, as well. Never been rejected from an
ACE show. But I sense that juries, and standards, are changing a bit.
I'm not going to sit over the computer and debate with the world all of
this. I've had my own private discussions with show directors, jurors,
other clay people. In the end, try out your ideas on film, send them in to
the shows, and try different things until you get a sense of how the system
works.
But the most important thing is, don't let show acceptances or rejections
color how you yourself view your work. In the end, it is your own feelings
about your work that are the most important.
Best,
Richard Aerni
Bloomfield, NY...been a long time since we've done a show together, Mr.
Mahaffey...
Paul Gerhold on mon 8 apr 02
Two ideas on evaluating slides for application to juried shows:
1) Always project your slides full size on a wall or screen. Small viewers
are inadequate.
2) Get a group of friends and do a slide critique before choosing which to
send. When you attempt to evaluate your own slides you are prejudiced by
knowing what the piece actually looks like. Use your group to pick a group of
slides that work well together and your chances of getting into the show will
improve.
Paul
Snail Scott on mon 8 apr 02
At 09:59 PM 4/7/02 -0700, Richard Mahaffey wrote:
>...I would never send a detail slide if it was not asked for.
Yes, very true. When this thread started, we were
responding to a question from someone who had been
asked specifically to provide a detail slide among
her entry slides for a particular show. This fact
may have gotten lost in the subsequent discussion.
Richard is quite correct, though. ONLY provide the
items/information which is requested by the show
organizers. Even if you think it would help to
represent your work better, don't send un-asked-for
materials. It won't help.
I always try to shoot a few detail slides when doing
my photography, but I don't send them unless asked.
-Snail
WHC228@AOL.COM on mon 8 apr 02
Good afternoon
I probably leaned more about slides by watching a jury work than any other
way. When I was looking at a jury work it was at the ODC (Ohio Designer
Craftsmen) meeting to decide on entrants for three of their shows. I don't
know if they still let people watch the jurying or not. The ACC also once
showed all of the applicants at their shows.
I think the hardest part of doing good slides is knowing what you are trying
to achieve.
I have used a photographer in Ohio for many years. You would think that he
would get it right all of the time, but that isn't so. I often have to ask
for shots of the same piece three of four times. While his slides are always
technically correct, they often do not capture the essence of the work. By
staying with the piece and working on it long enough we always seem to get
what I want.
A good slide is often far more valuable than the piece itself.
Bill in PA
claybair on wed 9 jul 03
I'll be happy when the slide becomes a relic and is
replaced by digital images. The Smithsonian
Show in a quite innovative move used them.
The judges praised their use. It apparently cut down
on the time spent judging. Each judge could go at
his/her own pace etc.
I read about it in Crafts Report magazine....
sorry don't remember which issue.
Gayle Bair
Bainbridge Island, WA
http://claybair.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Snail Scott
At 07:28 AM 7/9/03 -0700, you wrote:
>What is the name of the organization that has established a
>standardization for labeling entry slides?
The Library of Congress (in the US) has an official
slide-labeling format; it's as close as any I've heard
of to being adopted as a standard. However, it was
not developed for labeling art-documentation slides,
and lacks provisions for much of the information
desired by competition juries, galleries, etc. So,
most entities requesting slides prefer to establish
their own preferred format. Thye're never the same,
either, necessitating much re-labeling, and the too-
frequent replacement of slides which just won't
survive one more label change. Annoying, but that's
the 'state of the art' at present. It would be lovely
to have a standardized format, allowing one to pre-
label slide dupes immediately (or even during duping,
as some services allow), but it's not happened yet.
Don't fall for any claims of a 'standard format'. For
the arts, there isn't one, and labeling expensive
slide dupes with information that has to be re-done
before being sent anywhere merely reduces the usable
lifespan of the slide. Follow the instructions of each
specific prospectus precisely, and don't waste time
and slides by labeling them until you know what the
requested format will be.
To paraphrase W. Churchill: Slides: the worst form of
art documentation except for all the others.
-Snail
Jeanette Harris on wed 9 jul 03
I have a question for the Clayart Collective Brain:
Standardized Slide Labeling--
What is the name of the organization that has established a
standardization for labeling entry slides?
I know that I read it about 2 years ago in an article, but have lost
the reference. Also included in the article was a graphic showing
where the title, artist name, "up" arrow, etc. should go.
Anybody?
Please contact me off-list if you have the info.
Thanks,
Jeanette
--
"Monkeymind" refers to the Zen concept of a mind that chatters on.
It is the enemy of meditation.
Snail Scott on wed 9 jul 03
At 07:28 AM 7/9/03 -0700, you wrote:
>What is the name of the organization that has established a
>standardization for labeling entry slides?
The Library of Congress (in the US) has an official
slide-labeling format; it's as close as any I've heard
of to being adopted as a standard. However, it was
not developed for labeling art-documentation slides,
and lacks provisions for much of the information
desired by competition juries, galleries, etc. So,
most entities requesting slides prefer to establish
their own preferred format. Thye're never the same,
either, necessitating much re-labeling, and the too-
frequent replacement of slides which just won't
survive one more label change. Annoying, but that's
the 'state of the art' at present. It would be lovely
to have a standardized format, allowing one to pre-
label slide dupes immediately (or even during duping,
as some services allow), but it's not happened yet.
Don't fall for any claims of a 'standard format'. For
the arts, there isn't one, and labeling expensive
slide dupes with information that has to be re-done
before being sent anywhere merely reduces the usable
lifespan of the slide. Follow the instructions of each
specific prospectus precisely, and don't waste time
and slides by labeling them until you know what the
requested format will be.
To paraphrase W. Churchill: Slides: the worst form of
art documentation except for all the others.
-Snail
Kathi LeSueur on thu 10 jul 03
snail@MINDSPRING.COM wrote:
>At 07:28 AM 7/9/03 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>>What is the name of the organization that has established a
>>standardization for labeling entry slides?
>>
>>
>
>
>National Association of Independent Artists
>
>
Richard Aerni on thu 10 jul 03
The answer to the original question, I believe, is that the NAIA (National
Association of Independent Artists) is behind standardizing the format of
slides for show juries. Reason being, with each individual show having
their own information format for a slide, often the artist can use the
slide only once, since the info would be in the "wrong" place on the
slide. It's caught on with a great many high quality shows.
As for Gayle's enthusiastic comments on the Smithsonian using digital
images this year...I've got mixed feelings on it. While I can understand
the desire not to fly in a mixed and varied bag of jurors from all over
creation to see slides, as it adds to the cost of the jury process, I've
never figured the Smithsonian as a show that worries about costs.
I didn't apply to the Smithsonian Show this year, for the first time in a
couple of decades, because of their digital bent. For those who don't know
what this is about...the Smithsonian Women's Show is one of the top quality
craft shows in the USA. Good sales, great competition to get in, very
expensive booth fees, excellent venue (and plenty of elitism, but take my
comment on that with a grain of salt). I've done it three times over the
years. This year they decided to "go ditigal" with their applications.
You could still submit slides, but they would be digitalized for an
additional cost. It would cost you $45 dollars to submit digital images,
and $55 dollars for slides. The images would be put on a CD (if I remember
correctly) and sent to the individual judges so they could view them at
their own place, in their own time. No more sitting in a dark room,
watching slides flash quickly in front of you.
Of course, there is also no more helpful comments given as to who is
imitating who in the slides (it does go on, I've been on juries), no more
interaction of any kind among jurors. And I suppose (although I don't
know) it makes it just that much easier to alter an image of one's artwork,
or enhance it. So, you say, that's not much reason to be agin
progress...what's your beef, you old fart? And I must say, it's a kind of
elemental, inchoate, feeling, not yet a rational expression of firm
conviction. I just don't like it! To me, the essence of pottery is the
struggle of the independent potter with a material, an idea, a box full of
fire. Basic, timeless, rather primitive work, if truth be told. Except,
at the Smithsonian, it's gone modern, glitzy, convenient. Perhaps it's
just me, but it doesn't seem to be what it's all about. I've already got a
burr under my saddle about people who spend more time on the computer than
at their wheel, or in their studio. And who spend more time and money on
their cameras and equipment getting images instead of pots. This just
seems another step in that direction.
But bottom line is...it doesn't feel like me...doesn't feel like something
I want to be part of.
So there. I don't have to be, and I guess I won't. (And, I suppose, I may
change my mind over time.) I'm not against progress (I've got an oxyprobe,
have my clay mixed for me, even own a nice digital camera.). It just
doesn't feel right.
And it will continue to happen unless people speak out against it. I'd be
curious to hear others' thoughts on the matter. Is it just me, or is this
a harbinger of other things to come?
Best,
Richard Aerni
Bloomfield, NY...killing an hour in clean clothes for an appointment before
getting on the glazing togs for a last go before Ann Arbor...(timed out
again...damn! I'm glad I saved this rant before hitting send!)
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 21:21:05 -0700, claybair wrote:
>I'll be happy when the slide becomes a relic and is
>replaced by digital images. The Smithsonian
>Show in a quite innovative move used them.
>The judges praised their use. It apparently cut down
>on the time spent judging. Each judge could go at
>his/her own pace etc.
>I read about it in Crafts Report magazine....
> sorry don't remember which issue.
>
>Gayle Bair
>Bainbridge Island, WA
>http://claybair.com
>At 07:28 AM 7/9/03 -0700, you wrote:
>>What is the name of the organization that has established a
>>standardization for labeling entry slides?
Charles Moore on thu 10 jul 03
Hi, Gayle,
I agree with Gayle on moving to digital images. I am able--without any
fancy manipulation of the image or background--to take much sharper photos
of my pottery with my digital camera.
I would say, in general, that photography is not the potter's friend,
especially when photographing glossy glazes. I do a lot of chatter
trimming, and it is rather difficult to keep some of the subtleties from
blurring out with slides or paper photographs.
Charles
Sacramento----- Original Message -----
From: "claybair"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: Slides
> I'll be happy when the slide becomes a relic and is
> replaced by digital images. The Smithsonian
> Show in a quite innovative move used them.
> The judges praised their use. It apparently cut down
> on the time spent judging. Each judge could go at
> his/her own pace etc.
> I read about it in Crafts Report magazine....
> sorry don't remember which issue.
>
> Gayle Bair
> Bainbridge Island, WA
> http://claybair.com
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
L. P. Skeen on thu 10 jul 03
For those who don't know what this is about...the Smithsonian Women's Show
is one of the top quality
> craft shows in the USA.
Richard,
I'm interested to know why you are applying to a WOMEN's show...............
and if it's not actually a Women's show, why is it called that???
THanks
L
Richard Aerni on thu 10 jul 03
Lisa,
It is organized by the Women's Committee at the Smithsonian. I would guess
they are a committee, of women (!) who have to find some worthy activity to
fill their days while their husbands are out running the world...or
something like that. (Joke, people!) So, maybe I misstated the facts a
bit...but Women is in the name of the show.
There! Satisfied?
Richard
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:56:52 -0400, L. P. Skeen
wrote:
> For those who don't know what this is about...the Smithsonian Women's Show
>is one of the top quality
>> craft shows in the USA.
>
>Richard,
>I'm interested to know why you are applying to a WOMEN's
show...............
>and if it's not actually a Women's show, why is it called that???
>
>
Pat Southwood on thu 10 jul 03
Hi,
Why is it that galleries and competitions still ask for slides, but =
all professional photographers wont do them any more ? All they are =
prepared to do is digital stuff.
Personally, I have just entererd the 21st century and bought a digital =
camera, does anyone know if there is any gizmo I can get that will make =
slides from a digital camera? Could I print them onto acetate maybe? =
Still yearning for the s.l.r - but this looks fun. With some =
reservations though, I dont seem to be in control anymore, a freaky =
situation for a potter ? no ?
Pat.
Gail Phillips on thu 10 jul 03
Yes, there is a device to convert digital images to slides - it is called a
Film Recorder. They are not usually affordable for the home user, and that is
why professional labs are the only ones who have them. I have had slides made
from digital images at the rate of about $3 per slide, but this runs into some
cash pretty quickly.
Here is a link I found while Googling:
http://www.ctcsouth.com/chosecfr.htm
You can see what I am referring to. Maybe we could all chip in and get one for
the Clayart group!
- Gail Phillips
Praying Mantis Pottery
Russel Fouts on fri 11 jul 03
Charles,
> I agree with Gayle on moving to digital images. I am able--without any fancy manipulation of the image or background--to take much sharper photos of my pottery with my digital camera. I would say, in general, that photography is not the potter's friend, especially when photographing glossy glazes. I do a lot of chatter trimming, and it is rather difficult to keep some of the subtleties from blurring out with slides or paper photographs. <
The average consumer, digital cameras cannot come even close to good
used ($50) SLR with a good lens, tripod and floods ($200 total). I
suspect that there might be something wrong with your film camera or you
need a better one.
The really expensive professional digicams are getting close to the
quality of a good slide but the technology just isn't there yet.
I have a very good digicam that I'm very pleased with (Olympus C4000z,
under $450). I use the digicam for my web site and for good quick shots
but I'm keeping my 33 year old Canon Ftb for slides. The digicam just
can't beat it.
Try again with the above setup and Steve Meltzer's book "Photographing
your craft work". The majority of galleries, magazines, shows, juries
still want slides. While it's true that they then scan the slides for
printing at "relatively" low resolution in a magazine, brochure or
poster, they like to start with the highest resolution possible. Slides,
hands down.
Russel
--
Russel Fouts
Mes Potes & Mes Pots
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 2 223 02 75
Mobile: +32 476 55 38 75
Http://www.mypots.com
Home of "The Potters Portal"
Over 2300 Pottery Related Links!
Updated frequently
My work can also be seen on:
The World Crafts Council International Site: http://www.wccwis.gr
The World Crafts Council Belgium Site: http://wcc-bf.org (English
Pages)
EasyCraft: http://www.easycraft.org
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only
unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American
public." --U.S. President (and Nobel Peace Prize winner) Theodore
Roosevelt.
Russel Fouts on fri 11 jul 03
You're welcome, I was afraid my comments might seem too forceful.
Steve's is a good book, there are also others out there. As well as
magazine articles in ClayTimes by John Hesselberth and in Ceramics
Review. Steve writes a regular column for Crafts Report as well.
When buying a used camera, make sure you get one that can be set to
manual exposure and manual focus.
Having your slides scanned on to CD is the way to go. Much cheaper than
the digital camera you'd require for the same quality and you get the
best of both worlds.
have fun
Russel
Charles Moore wrote:
>
> Hi, Russell,
>
> This is the first real help that I have had. Thank you. I will start with
> Steve Meltzer's book.
>
> One problem I encountered this year was that some ceramics journals want
> only slides and others want only digital images. To review one show I had
> to provide both techniques. However, I am now able to scan slides into
> digital images, so that may solve the problem.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Charles Moore
> Sacramento
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Russel Fouts"
> To: "Clayart List" ;
> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 12:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Slides
>
> > Charles,
> >
> > > I agree with Gayle on moving to digital images. I am able--without any
> fancy manipulation of the image or background--to take much sharper photos
> of my pottery with my digital camera. I would say, in general, that
> photography is not the potter's friend, especially when photographing glossy
> glazes. I do a lot of chatter trimming, and it is rather difficult to keep
> some of the subtleties from blurring out with slides or paper photographs. <
> >
> > The average consumer, digital cameras cannot come even close to good
> > used ($50) SLR with a good lens, tripod and floods ($200 total). I
> > suspect that there might be something wrong with your film camera or you
> > need a better one.
> >
> > The really expensive professional digicams are getting close to the
> > quality of a good slide but the technology just isn't there yet.
> >
> > I have a very good digicam that I'm very pleased with (Olympus C4000z,
> > under $450). I use the digicam for my web site and for good quick shots
> > but I'm keeping my 33 year old Canon Ftb for slides. The digicam just
> > can't beat it.
> >
> > Try again with the above setup and Steve Meltzer's book "Photographing
> > your craft work". The majority of galleries, magazines, shows, juries
> > still want slides. While it's true that they then scan the slides for
> > printing at "relatively" low resolution in a magazine, brochure or
> > poster, they like to start with the highest resolution possible. Slides,
> > hands down.
> >
> > Russel
> >
> > --
> >
> > Russel Fouts
> > Mes Potes & Mes Pots
> > Brussels, Belgium
> > Tel: +32 2 223 02 75
> > Mobile: +32 476 55 38 75
> >
> > Http://www.mypots.com
> > Home of "The Potters Portal"
> > Over 2300 Pottery Related Links!
> > Updated frequently
> >
> > My work can also be seen on:
> > The World Crafts Council International Site: http://www.wccwis.gr
> > The World Crafts Council Belgium Site: http://wcc-bf.org (English
> > Pages)
> > EasyCraft: http://www.easycraft.org
> >
> > "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
> > we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only
> > unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American
> > public." --U.S. President (and Nobel Peace Prize winner) Theodore
> > Roosevelt.
--
Russel Fouts
Mes Potes & Mes Pots
Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 2 223 02 75
Mobile: +32 476 55 38 75
Http://www.mypots.com
Home of "The Potters Portal"
Over 1800 Pottery Links!
Updated frequently
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president,
or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."
U.S. President (and Nobel Peace Prize winner) Theodore Roosevelt.
Bob Nicholson on fri 11 jul 03
>Hi,
>Why is it that galleries and competitions still ask for slides,
>but all professional photographers wont do them any more ? All they
>are prepared to do is digital stuff.
It does seem that establishing standards for slide submissions is somewhat like
"fighting the last war." A worthwhile effort, but maybe an effort should
have gone into establishing recommendations and standards for digital
submission.
I think there are currently some legitimate reasons for resisting the move to
digital submissions:
* Slides still offer significantly better resolution than all but the top
professional digital cameras. A slide is roughly "equivalent" to a digital
image of 20 megapixels, while most cameras are in the 3-5 megapixel
range.
* Digital cameras compress images using "lossey" algorithms. That phrase
means exactly what it sounds like... you LOSE detail in the
photo. So you're
not even getting the full sharpness of that 3-5 megapixel image!
* Let's suppose for a moment that the camera took a 20 megapixel image and
did not compress it. The juror still could not VIEW IT with the
same sharpness
as a projected slide, because typical display sizes ranges from
1/2 megapixel
to 2 megapixel ... much less than slides.
* There is a genuine issue with modifying digital photos. I often make use of
photo editing software to improve contrast or adjust color balance. But it
would be just as easy to enhance the richness of my glazes,
remove imperfections
and generally alter the image. And unfortunately, it's a
slippery slope. Where
does "adjusting the color balance" end and "faking the glaze color" begin?
I think shows will probably move to digitial submissions in the near
future... but
it would be great of some standards bodies would consider issues like
these before
we make the move.
- Bob
John Anthony on fri 11 jul 03
Richard wrote-
>>
>>I've already got a
>>burr under my saddle about people who spend more time on the computer than
>>at their wheel, or in their studio. And who spend more time and money on
>>their cameras and equipment getting images instead of pots. This just
>>seems another step in that direction.
ow- that hits a little close to home. I worry a bit about this. Last
night when I should have been loading a bisque, I was instead
photographing pots and getting them tweaked up in Photoshop so they'd
look just right on the web...
uh oh...
really they didn't need that much tweaking...
I guess the plus side is that I actually can take photos of my own pots
now- I don't have to schlep all the pots to a studio then wait two weeks
to find out the color balance is wrong. I just go upstairs to my little rig
and drop a pot in and shoot a picture. I did buy a few lights, a
backdrop and a nice camera- oh yeah and a loptop to run Photoshop on
-oh yeah and a nice photo printer so I don't have to pay the
photographer for prints....
...it adds up.
It is fun, though, and I like pictures of pots, although I do think you
should have to put the weight in the description along with the size. I
know Richard makes great pots, and someday I'll be in the same room with
one- until then I get a lot of information from good photos.
I've been in the music business my whole adult life and I got into it
basically because i liked making tapes of my bands when I was a kid. (I
liked making the music, but i really liked being able to listen to my
own band in the car ) i was the only person I knew with an 8 track
cartridge recorder.
I enjoy being able to control the process of taking pictures of my own
work, and I like that I've been able to learn enough about web design
to slap together my own website. Every new thing you learn to do or
undertake to do, takes away from time making pots. That is a drag. The
real problem is that there
just isn't enough time- there never really has been.
cheers
John A
www.redhillpottery.com
Roger Korn on fri 11 jul 03
Bob Nicholson wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Why is it that galleries and competitions still ask for slides,
>> but all professional photographers wont do them any more ? All they
>> are prepared to do is digital stuff.
>
>
> It does seem that establishing standards for slide submissions is
> somewhat like
> "fighting the last war." A worthwhile effort, but maybe an effort should
> have gone into establishing recommendations and standards for digital
> submission.
>
> I think there are currently some legitimate reasons for resisting the
> move to
> digital submissions:
>
> * Slides still offer significantly better resolution than all but the
> top
> professional digital cameras. A slide is roughly "equivalent" to
> a digital
> image of 20 megapixels, while most cameras are in the 3-5 megapixel
> range.
>
> * Digital cameras compress images using "lossey" algorithms. That phrase
> means exactly what it sounds like... you LOSE detail in the
> photo.
But not as much detail as is lost by the projection step! Even the best
of the Carousels will not give the on-screen
detail as that provided by a 4 megapixel image projected on the same
screen by a good InFocus. Try shooting
resolution test screens both ways - examined with a loupe, the slide is
indeed better, but the astigmatism and loss
of flat field projected by the slide projector throws all that away.
That's why slides are scanned for publication,
rather than being re-photographed from a paste-up. The very best slide
projectors ($5K and up) do a better job than the
$2K digital projectors, but no one travels with these, and they are not
found in the typical jury process for the
simple reason that it takes LOTS of money to show just a LITTLE
improvement. And color correction is much simpler
with a digital image.
All of these arguements are rather moot: both systems deliver excellent
results for jurying purposes.
Roger
> So you're
> not even getting the full sharpness of that 3-5 megapixel image!
>
> * Let's suppose for a moment that the camera took a 20 megapixel image
> and
> did not compress it. The juror still could not VIEW IT with the
> same sharpness
> as a projected slide, because typical display sizes ranges from
> 1/2 megapixel
> to 2 megapixel ... much less than slides.
>
> * There is a genuine issue with modifying digital photos. I often
> make use of
> photo editing software to improve contrast or adjust color
> balance. But it
> would be just as easy to enhance the richness of my glazes,
> remove imperfections
> and generally alter the image. And unfortunately, it's a
> slippery slope. Where
> does "adjusting the color balance" end and "faking the glaze
> color" begin?
>
> I think shows will probably move to digitial submissions in the near
> future... but
> it would be great of some standards bodies would consider issues like
> these before
> we make the move.
>
> - Bob
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
>
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
> melpots@pclink.com.
>
Paul Lewing on fri 11 jul 03
on 7/11/03 11:35 AM, Bob Nicholson at bob@WYGK.COM wrote:
>> Why is it that galleries and competitions still ask for slides,
>> but all professional photographers wont do them any more ? All they
>> are prepared to do is digital stuff.
> I think there are currently some legitimate reasons for resisting the move to
> digital submissions:
>
> * Slides still offer significantly better resolution than all but the top
> professional digital cameras.
> * Digital cameras compress images using "lossey" algorithms
> The juror still could not VIEW IT with the
> same sharpness as a projected slide
> * There is a genuine issue with modifying digital photos.
>
> I think shows will probably move to digitial submissions in the near
> future.
These are probably good reasons why digital images are not more used, but I
don't think they're the real reason everybody wants slides. Here are the
reasons I think we won't see a move away from slides any time soon.
EVERYBODY has a slide carousel projector. Everybody's slides fit it and
everybody knows how to use it. And it's easy to show multiple images at
once, all projected to good viewing size, with multiple projectors. And any
organization can easily round up as many projectors as they need.
Organizations also know that not all artists have access to digital
technology, but they know all artists have slides.
Very few organizations have a person who is confident enough with the
technology to deal with hundreds of digital images. Nor do they have
confidence that if they send a disc (or whatever) with those hundreds of
images on it to a juror, the juror will have the expertise to deal with
them.
If the digital images are sent electronically, there can be numerous
technical problems. I have a phone modem connection, and it takes about ten
minutes for a digital image like this to download. And they often cannot be
viewed, for some reasons that I do not understand, and neither will these
organizations.
The bottom line is, slides are here to stay, for quite some years to come.
They're cheap, everybody has them, and everybody knows how to deal with
them. And they have reasonable confidence that the images have not been
doctored.
Paul Lewing, Seattle
Bobbruch1@AOL.COM on sat 12 jul 03
<<<< Russel Fouts writes: When buying a used
camera, make sure you get one that can be set to manual exposure and manual focus.
Older manual SLR's (single lens reflex 35 mm cameras) have come down in price
significantly in the past few years. You can get a good quality 20 or 30
year old camera in great working order for a fraction of what you would have paid
a few years ago. A 50 mm lens and an 85 or 105 or 135 mm telephoto lens
would be a good setup.You might even get by with just the 85 or 105 mm by itself.
The zoom lenses of that period did not match up in sharpness to the set
lenses, and costs for the set lenses are not that great right now. You will need a
handheld light meter, also available on the used market, but it would be nice
to have the light meter on the camera working as well. A professional quality
backdrop costs around $50. A quality local camera store will have a few
examples, probably even refurbished. EBay would be cheaper, but you have to know
what you are doing .... but, it is a good place to check prices, although you
never know what you are getting. B&H Camera has a used department on line and
I have heard that they are reliable, but you have to know what you are
looking for. Have heard the same about KEH out of Atlanta. Good place to compare
prices with your local dealer. You need a tripod, which is also available from
the same sources .... worth spending some extra $$ for quality/stability. A
shutter release cable and you are all set.
<<<<the digital camera you'd require for the same quality and you get the best of
both worlds.
The new category killer in digital is the Nikon D100, now selling for less
than $1500, but that may not include lenses. Canon has something more powerful,
but at 2X or 3X in cost. That is the Internet price, not the price at the
local store. There are supposedly good cameras available in the $700 to $1000
range, but you need to ask someone who knows digital what the differences are. I
am hoping that the "need" to go digital coincides with the D100 selling at
$100 (I can dream, can't I?)
After that, you need software, maybe a course in Photoshop, a quality
printer, & maybe a new computer to handle the software.
If you do have slides, there are scanners on the market for below $200 (and
dropping fast) that have slide brackets embedded in the cover. Nikon has a
great machine for around $2000, but a pro has told me that I would be just fine
with a $200 Epsom unless I wanted to make an 8X10 print. I am only guessing,
but I would assume that you could put scanned slides onto a CD without needing
to know the full range of Photoshop, and then pick that info up along the way
as your interest increases. That is probably the route that I am going to use.
Another option with slides is to have a CD made along with the slide
processing, but this decision has to be made when you develop the slides. This is not
cheap, and you do not get to see the quality of the photos before you make
the decision. Look around, because the different photolabs have varying prices
for this service. It may depend on what your needs for resolution are. I
used to be able to get low level resolution CD's done for a moderate price, but
that lab closed down. I think you can still make CD's out of slides after they
are processed, but the price on that rises dramatically. Either one is still a
lot cheaper than buying all of the equipment that you need for digital unless
you are producing large volumes of photos. And the longer you hold out, the
greater the savings since the cameras, computers, printers and software are
dropping in price on a daily basis.
Hope this helps.
Bob Bruch
Hank Murrow on sat 12 jul 03
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 04:46 AM, Bobbruch1@AOL.COM wrote:
> Another option with slides is to have a CD made along with the slide
> processing, but this decision has to be made when you develop the
> slides. This is not
> cheap, and you do not get to see the quality of the photos before you
> make
> the decision. I think you can still make CD's out of slides after they
> are processed, but the price on that rises dramatically.
Dear Bob, and others caught on the 'Digital Divide';
I have always shot my archive pics with a Minolta SRT 101 with a 100mm
macro lens, on a tripod with a cable release and using Fuji RTP-11
slide film, and a color corrected tungsten bulb. Great resolution (the
photofinisher says that each 35mm slide can have the equivalent of 18Mb
of information!), but how to send over the web?
My photofinisher develops each roll, calls me when the uncut roll is
ready to look at (4 hours or so), and I come in to look at the
filmstrip. If the quality is good, he then makes a CD for $11 which has
each image in 5 resolutions up to 700Kb. Or if I want more, $17 fro a
hi-rez CD which adds a set at 1.5Mb per image. The key is not having
the roll mounted until the CD has been made. Way cheaper that way.
Soon I will have to get a digicam for general record keeping and web
pics, but I will probably always use film for 'record' shots of my ware.
Cheers, Hank
Janet Kaiser on sat 12 jul 03
>Do you realize how often your beautiful slides are quickly held up in
front
>of a lamp or window??????
Marie is quite right... I don't mean in jury conditions where there are a
panel of judges formally set up to review all entries, but those ordinary
run-of-the-mill submissions to shows, exhibitions, galleries and
commissioning agents/clients.
For example, imagine a gallerist or curator of a smallish venue who gets
post in drips and drabs from the start of a submission period right to the
end (and beyond), say over three months to a year. Worse scenario if
submissions for several exhibitions are running concurrently.
Anyway... They get these envelopes with CVs and slides either loose, in
fiddly little individual wrappers or in those plastic sheets. Quickly skim
through the CV, then hold up the slides to desktop lamp or window... Yes?
Possibly? Definitely Not? Already the first choice has been made.
BTW in some offices there will be a little hand-held slide viewer, but is
it going to be searched for when there is only one submission that day? Are
the batteries working? Is it worth getting it out for just one set of
slides? It is any better than holding up to the lamp/window?
Anyway, those that went into the Yes pile get another serious viewing with
full screen set-up at a later date when the final selection is made, as
maybe the Possibles will too... Depends on the volume of work being
submitted, space available, etc. The Definitely Nots landed straight in the
out tray...
Don't scream at me! It is the reality of how things work. And to be fair, a
lot of the Definitely Nots are those submissions which do not meet the
stated criteria of the proposed exhibition. All those teapots when the
exhibition is to be of "ceramic sculpture in the landscape" or vice versa.
You don't think it happens...? Ask any gallerist, curator or juror...
I believe that we are only at the beginning of a very exciting time where
digital is concerned. We all continue to think of images as "stills", but
with CAD, cam-corders and the rest... Well, it going to be quite terrific!
Imagine getting a CD with a pot turning around in front of you, looking at
its bottom and then inside. Placing it on a table zoom out, zoom back...
Suddenly that glossy pot so difficult to capture on slide/film becomes a
shining, scintillating object you want to rewind to see it sparkling
again... Virtual reality with real objects.
Even have the pots selected for exhibition edited onto CDs and used as part
of the final show... Hah! You could even make little brown pots come alive!
Wake the public up to the vitality inherent in almost any pot! We have a
generation who have learned to see through their TV screens... Walking
toilet cleaners, talking candy bars, dancing milk bottles... All accessible
and sexy thanks to animation! Why not sturdy little pots they would
otherwise not look at once, never mind twice? I personally look forward to
it all as the amazing technological/software now in its infancy develops
and will make so much more feasible... As creative artists and innovators,
the challenge will be to utilise all the tools those geeks provide... Lead
the way!
HOWEVER that is stuff for the future and in the meantime digital technology
must not be at the cost of those artists/makers who do not have access to
all the necessary gear. That is my main concern with digital submissions
here and now... I think those who are part of any selection process should
constantly remind themselves that the pressure of time, work and yes, some
degree of laziness which gives CD digital images an advantage over
slides/photos and they must remain scrupulously fair.
Sincerely
Janet Kaiser -- waiting for my Kiwi Cousin to arrive for a visit via
Scotland, Corsica and Heathrow!
**********************************************************************
TRUTH is too precious to tell every fool who asks for it...
****** This post was sent to you today by Janet Kaiser *******
The Chapel of Art / Capel Celfyddyd
8 Marine Crescent, Criccieth LL52 0EA, Wales, UK
Tel: ++44 (01766) 523570 URL: http://www.the-coa.org.uk
**********************************************************************
Pat Southwood on sun 13 jul 03
Hi,
Janet, you confirmed my suspicions, any reasonable person, to my mind, =
would hold a slide up to the light for an initial scrutiny (and =
decision) rather than faff about with a computer.=20
Also, I hadnt thought about the manipulation of images, i.e cheating.
The 1st 100 slides I did at college on graduation, with the photography =
technician doing the lights and me taking the shots.
The next 100 slides I had done by a professional photographer who has =
done a lot of work for the nearest branch of the Arts Council. He =
"swopped" for two pots, worth at retail =A3140
On balance ,I think I will do the next lot myself. He has gone totally =
digital now and wont do any other work, as everyone else.
I had great fun with the digital camera today, I took my students to =
John Chipperfields pottery in Suffolk for a raku day. (plug, plug)
Being able to delete the bum shots (literally !) was groovy.
left home at 8am, firing from 9,30 am - 9pm, got home 10 30 pm. =
phew, did I smell.
The best was a gremlin - type mask thingy , which whilst being reduced , =
shot flames from its' open mouth !
Took a lovely Japanese lady who was introduced to raku for the first =
time............
good day.
Best,=20
Pat.
Earl Brunner on mon 14 jul 03
I think people over complicate this digital versus film thing. IF you
intend to print from the digital, then yes it can be an issue, BUT if
you are going to view it as an electronic image on a computer or
projected then pixels don't really have to be film quality. It's the
nature of the beast that even low pixel images look pretty good on a
computer, look at the images on web pages for example.
The cheating thing, to me is a none-issue. First a good photographer
with regular film can make a bad pot look good (cheating). How is that
different than touching up a digital image if you aren't changing the
pot? And second, most venues are going to, or SHOULD have, some kind of
wording in their rules that holds the submitter responsible for having
the slide or digital image accurately represent the object. Objects
found not to be as represented should be disqualified.
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Pat
Southwood
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 4:57 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: slides
Hi,
Janet, you confirmed my suspicions, any reasonable person, to my mind,
would hold a slide up to the light for an initial scrutiny (and
decision) rather than faff about with a computer.
Also, I hadnt thought about the manipulation of images, i.e cheating.
Dannon Rhudy on tue 15 jul 03
Earl said:
> The cheating thing, to me is a none-issue.
.....most venues ......SHOULD have, some kind of
> wording in their rules that holds the submitter responsible
. Objects found not to be as represented should be disqualified.....>>
Most juried shows do indeed say that "work that differs from the
accepted slide(s)" will be disqualified, or disqualified at the discretion
of the juror. A reasonable requirement.
regards
Dannon Rhudy
Chris Leake on fri 25 mar 05
http://www.slideplus.com
My son , Jeff, is a painter and teacher. He sent me this site address. It is where he gets slides printed from his pictures. I haven't had a chance to use them yet but thought it was worth sharing. If it works out to be a good site for you let him know at http://www.wku.edu/Dept/Academic/AHSS/Art/people/faculty/leake/leake.htm
Frank Gaydos on sun 2 jan 11
Robert=3D20
I asked one of our photo instructors at work what he would recommend, He st=
=3D
ates,=3D20
"He should go to the local museum and rent their slide scanner or pay their=
=3D
archivist.=3D20
If there are a ton of them he could try a service like:=3D20
http://www.scancafe.com/services/pro-options =3DC2=3DA0"=3D20
I may try them myself since I just found my old Viet Nam pics.=3D20
I'm hoping to upload them to my web site and to a buddies site at:=3D20
http://647thquartermaster.com/=3D20
http://www.scancafe.com/services/pro-options =3DC2=3DA0"=3D20
I may try them myself since I just found my old Viet Nam pics.=3D20
I'm hoping to upload them to my web site and to a buddies site at:=3D20
http://647thquartermaster.com/=3D20
Frank Gaydos=3D20
| |
|
