Carolynn Palmer on mon 31 jan 00
In a message dated 1/30/0 09:23:02 PM, you wrote:
> I was also interested in your description of what you did with your
>slides. I hope you will not mind my contacting you in the future to ask you
>more about this.
This was in response to a Clayarter explaining how they had changed their
slides using Adobe Photo Shop.
As someone who has sat on juries for shows and also sends in slides to jury
into shows - I find this very scarey and in my opinion quite dishonorable.
As a jurist, when I am looking at someone else's slides, I assume they are
the work as it will appear in their booth. If this trend continues, it won't
be the best pots in the shows or in the competitions, it will be the potter
who can best alter his slides and make the best use of Adobe Photo Shop!!
Also, as a potter who is attempting to get into shows with my untouched
slides, how can I hope to compete against someone who has altered and touched
up their work using a computer and software?
Carolynn Palmer, Somerset Center, Michigan
Cindy Strnad on tue 1 feb 00
Carolyn,
I see your point, however the potter in question had not altered the slides
in any way I could possibly imagine would be considered dishonest. She
merely pasted the pottery onto a more conventional backdrop and dimmed
excessive shine. This is nothing that can't be done, and done better, I'll
bet, by a professional photographer.
Cindy Strnad
earthenv@gwtc.net
Earthen Vessels Pottery
RR 1, Box 51
Custer, SD 57730
Hank Murrow on tue 1 feb 00
During a lecture at the University of Oregon in 1968, titled, "The
Simulacrum", Michael Cardew staed that American potters were making very
good slides. In my attempts to interest stores, shops, and galleries in my
work; I have repeatedly found the proprietors unwilling to look at, handle,
or use my ware before 'screening' it via the 35mm slide. Once, while
showing actual work to a proprietor, I put the work in his hands whereupon
he refused it, making me 'take it back!' I invest a lot of energy in making
sure that my ware is pleasant to the touch and comfortable in use; and it
is discouraging to have it evaluated solely on it's visual merit, or even
worse, on a slide's visual merit. Grumble, grumble....Hank in Eugene,
thanking God for friends and family who continue to prefer my ware.
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
>In a message dated 1/30/0 09:23:02 PM, you wrote:
>
>> I was also interested in your description of what you did with your
>>slides. I hope you will not mind my contacting you in the future to ask you
>>more about this.
>
>This was in response to a Clayarter explaining how they had changed their
>slides using Adobe Photo Shop.
>
>As someone who has sat on juries for shows and also sends in slides to jury
>into shows - I find this very scarey and in my opinion quite dishonorable.
>
>As a jurist, when I am looking at someone else's slides, I assume they are
>the work as it will appear in their booth. If this trend continues, it won't
>be the best pots in the shows or in the competitions, it will be the potter
>who can best alter his slides and make the best use of Adobe Photo Shop!!
>
>Also, as a potter who is attempting to get into shows with my untouched
>slides, how can I hope to compete against someone who has altered and touched
>up their work using a computer and software?
>
>Carolynn Palmer, Somerset Center, Michigan
The Buchanans on tue 1 feb 00
Carolyn, What is fair about judging from slides? Does the better
photographer with the better camera win? Is it unfair if one can afford the
best professional photographer? ( boy, does THAT make a difference) Is it OK
to have a negative cropped for better composition? Is that less unfair than
blurring a confusing back ground to show the pottery better?
A juror should be able to judge the pot. What's wrong with helping him see
it better. Now if someone is REALLY good with Photo Shop and stretches a
nine inch pot to sixteen , changes the glaze and touches up the blemishes---
that is another story. Judi Buchanan
----- Original Message -----
From: Carolynn Palmer
To:
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 11:49 AM
Subject: Altered Slides/Was Update from a Lurker
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
> In a message dated 1/30/0 09:23:02 PM, you wrote:
>
> > I was also interested in your description of what you did with
your
> >slides. I hope you will not mind my contacting you in the future to ask
you
> >more about this.
>
> This was in response to a Clayarter explaining how they had changed their
> slides using Adobe Photo Shop.
>
> As someone who has sat on juries for shows and also sends in slides to
jury
> into shows - I find this very scarey and in my opinion quite dishonorable.
>
> As a jurist, when I am looking at someone else's slides, I assume they are
> the work as it will appear in their booth. If this trend continues, it
won't
> be the best pots in the shows or in the competitions, it will be the
potter
> who can best alter his slides and make the best use of Adobe Photo Shop!!
>
> Also, as a potter who is attempting to get into shows with my untouched
> slides, how can I hope to compete against someone who has altered and
touched
> up their work using a computer and software?
>
> Carolynn Palmer, Somerset Center, Michigan
Ray Aldridge on tue 1 feb 00
At 02:49 PM 1/31/00 EST, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
>In a message dated 1/30/0 09:23:02 PM, you wrote:
>
>> I was also interested in your description of what you did with your
>>slides. I hope you will not mind my contacting you in the future to ask you
>>more about this.
>
>This was in response to a Clayarter explaining how they had changed their
>slides using Adobe Photo Shop.
>
>As someone who has sat on juries for shows and also sends in slides to jury
>into shows - I find this very scarey and in my opinion quite dishonorable.
I think you're somewhat overwrought here. All the person changed was the
background behind her pots-- which has nothing to do with the reality of
her work.
>
>As a jurist, when I am looking at someone else's slides, I assume they are
>the work as it will appear in their booth. If this trend continues, it won't
>be the best pots in the shows or in the competitions, it will be the potter
>who can best alter his slides and make the best use of Adobe Photo Shop!!
I'm sorry, but it has never been the "best pots" in the shows. It has been
the best-photographed pots. The quality of one's photography has always
been of greater importance than the quality of one's pots, when it comes to
getting into shows that jury via slides. So what you fear is only an
elaboration of a problem which already exists.
>
>Also, as a potter who is attempting to get into shows with my untouched
>slides, how can I hope to compete against someone who has altered and touched
>up their work using a computer and software?
>
You should have little to worry about. The person who was altering her
background is probably barking up the wrong tree-- very good slides are a
much better way to get into good shows than doctoring poor slides with
Photoshop. The skill it takes to doctor images in ways that are not
immediately apparent even to the untrained eye is as rare as the skill
needed to make brilliant pots. She'd probably be a lot better off buying a
Varitone background and making a soft box than spending the equivalent
amount of time doctoring slides with Photoshop. And this is not a cheap
process-- having the doctored image files made into slides costs a fair
amount of money.
Anyone with a moderate degree of skill with a camera can learn to make good
slides. I recommend John Hesselberth's articles on photgraphing pots (I
don't have the URL handy, sorry) His inexpensive technique made a
tremendous difference in the quality of the shots I take-- and it ends up
being a whole lot cheaper than the Photoshop route.
Anyway, don't worry. The virtual reality apocalypse is not yet upon us.
Ray
Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
http://www.goodpots.com
Norman van der Sluys on tue 1 feb 00
As someone with considerable experience in photography as well as computer
graphics I can tell you that Adobe Photo Shop, or other similar software does no
have a monopoly on enhancing the subject matter. Lighting for photographs is an
art, and I am sure many a jury is swayed by the ability of the photographer.
Slides of pots are definitely not an objective record of those pots. Jurors
should be aware of this and try to look at those slides for more subtle clues
about the nature of the pots themselves than crispnes of contour and
harmonization of background.
Incidentally, those pots will definitely not look the same in the booth as they
do with carefully placed lighting and neutral background designed to manipulate
(or eliminate) shadow effects.
Norman van der Sluys
Jackpottery!
Carolynn Palmer wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
> In a message dated 1/30/0 09:23:02 PM, you wrote:
>
> > I was also interested in your description of what you did with your
> >slides. I hope you will not mind my contacting you in the future to ask you
> >more about this.
>
> This was in response to a Clayarter explaining how they had changed their
> slides using Adobe Photo Shop.
>
> As someone who has sat on juries for shows and also sends in slides to jury
> into shows - I find this very scarey and in my opinion quite dishonorable.
>
> As a jurist, when I am looking at someone else's slides, I assume they are
> the work as it will appear in their booth. If this trend continues, it won't
> be the best pots in the shows or in the competitions, it will be the potter
> who can best alter his slides and make the best use of Adobe Photo Shop!!
>
> Also, as a potter who is attempting to get into shows with my untouched
> slides, how can I hope to compete against someone who has altered and touched
> up their work using a computer and software?
>
> Carolynn Palmer, Somerset Center, Michigan
Earl Brunner on wed 2 feb 00
I understand the expressed concerns, however I agree with Cindy here.
I am not a professional photographer, I'm not too bad about the back-
grounds, but sometimes my shots need cropping and sometimes, especially
on high gloss glazes, I get glare that diminishes the quality of the
representation
of the work. Correcting photographic defects should not be considered
bad, in my opinion. A professional photographer can misrepresent the
quality of a piece of work by using his skills with lighting and filters and
film.
In my view this could be considered as unethical as well. The point is, the
slide should be a good, accurate repesentation of the work in question.
Most shows have a disclaimer that stipulates if the work in question is
not as represented by the slides, they can disqualify the work.
Cindy Strnad wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Carolyn,
>
> I see your point, however the potter in question had not altered the slides
> in any way I could possibly imagine would be considered dishonest. She
> merely pasted the pottery onto a more conventional backdrop and dimmed
> excessive shine. This is nothing that can't be done, and done better, I'll
> bet, by a professional photographer.
>
> Cindy Strnad
> earthenv@gwtc.net
> Earthen Vessels Pottery
> RR 1, Box 51
> Custer, SD 57730
--
Earl Brunner
http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec
mailto:bruec@anv.net
| |
|
