Re: Name's

Witho,

I like the "update"At 05:55 AM 9/9/2004, you wrote: part. Kinda mod and
also descriptive without being cute.

UPHIS doesn't quite cut it. HISPUP? Historical Process Update? Too
cute Gotta think of the grant angle too. Can't be flippant or cute, nor
too obscure.

I'm pretty excited about the idea of the Center. I've established the
not-for-profit corporation in New Mexico and am working on the massive
paperwork for the federal tax exempt status. I have a lawyer on the board
which helps.

I've done a lot of checking and there isn't anything quite like it out
there. There are lots of groups designed purely to pass money on to
deserving young artists. Not a bad thing, but not very unique either. I see
all kinds of things we can do like: serious workshops on advanced
techniques, seminars for curators, conservators, etc, an education program
(MFA), republication of rare process books, a library and research center,
small seminars for specialized process workers (i.g. carbon), A journal and
occasional papers, research grants (Woodbury, Autochrome, etc. (tied to MFA?)

I think we can pull it off. It will take time though.

--Dick

>What about 'Update on Historical Photographic Technique', Up His ?
>
>The first part is meant to be serious, the annual Update.
>
>Witho
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Sullivan" <richsul@earthlink.net>
>To: <carbon@spitbite.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 6:22 PM
>Subject: Re: [carbon] Name's
>
>
> > Witho,
> >
> > Well said!
> >
> > The terms may change due to context. For the most formal situations I
> > prefer "Historical" but will use "hand made" when appropriate. "Chemical
> > Based" might be used in a classroom discussion where the context is clear.
> > Uncle Bill may not get a glimmer as to what that means when discussing it
> > with him.
> >
> > We are planning an APIS next summer. It may find a name change and will
> > fall under the Center for Photographic History and Technology. The
> > "alternative" in title is a problem as we have discussed here. Any ideas
> > for a name for the symposium?
> >
> > --Dick
> >
> > At 12:48 AM 9/8/2004, you wrote:
> > >By trying to establish a taxonomy of photographic processes it is
>inevitably
> > >to come to crossovers. They show that techniques are not as separate from
> > >each other as we would wish, for definition purposes alone.
> > >
> > >If I describe what I am doing I most of the time talk about Historical
> > >Processes. Processes that still very clearly in touch with their
>historical
> > >photographic roots. Then I date them as from before 1900. I use the word
> > >handmade, say UV and point at the sun. I also talk bout the Graphics
> > >contrary to digital printmaking. I use the distinction between chemical
> > >based to digital and more down the line I will divide between metal based
> > >and pigment based.
> > >The problem with defining is not describing what something is but to
>exclude
> > >other things even for the future.
> > >
> > >Vintage I will use to determine who made the print, in the case of
>vintage
> > >it is the photographers self. This term goes back to the time that
> > >photographers knew how to print. Could be inkjet though.
> > >
> > >In my sense Alternative is a inadequate term. It describes no content but
> > >relates to something else, anything else then alternative. If we were
>able
> > >to describe what that something else is we also can describe what we mean
>by
> > >'our' technique. Besides, there are very few people who develop an
> > >alternative technique. Maybe Webb and Reed came close to describe
> > >Alternative technique in their 'Spirits and Salts' but only alternatives
>for
> > >the traditional historical printing techniques.
> > >
> > >I think it is best to have an international convention in Santa Fe, next
> > >summer for instance to, and give it a name.
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >
> > >Witho
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
> > >carbon mailing list
> > >carbon@spitbite.org
> > >FAQ at http://spitbite.org/carbon/list.html
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
> > carbon mailing list
> > carbon@spitbite.org
> > FAQ at http://spitbite.org/carbon/list.html
> >
>
>_______________________________________________
>Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
>carbon mailing list
>carbon@spitbite.org
>FAQ at http://spitbite.org/carbon/list.html

_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
carbon mailing list
carbon@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/carbon/list.html
Received on Thu Sep 9 07:23:38 2004