“My triumph as a counterfeiter was my defeat as a creative artist.”
- Han van Meergeren, artist and forger
Frozen Raindrop
Han van Meergeren was a Dutch painter who became a famous forger during the early 1900s and especially during World War II. He refined his technical painting skill so thoroughly, that he became quite wealthy by forging works of well known Dutch painters at the time. He paid attention to every minute detail, from buying authentic 17th century canvas, to mixing his own paints from the formulas of the masters, to studying their lives and catalogs of work, to further define his commitment to “authenticity.”
His life story becomes even more interesting when he gets entangled in dealing art with the Nazis.
Because he was increasingly scorned by art critics, van Meergeren set out to show he had every bit of genius as the masters he forged. His ultimate masterpiece was planned to be a forgery of a famous painter called Vermeer, but his plan ultimately backfired.
Read More
Happy Leap Day everyone Unfortunately, something that will not be returning in 4 years is Polaroid film It has only been a couple of weeks since the company announced they would no longer be making it I listened to another story about it today on NPR Not only is that huge Polaroid camera amazing, but I also found some of the comments interesting in the story.
“Dorfman says the “seduction” of the digital camera ” the ability to take picture after picture until snapping a good one ” does not mean it’s actually a better process.
“The person is more on if they know they only have a few shots,” she says.”
I think this highlights an important aspect in image making that maybe will get lost in the digital generation Slowing down Just because repeated pixels are ‘free’ – doesn’t mean we don’t owe the capture sufficient time for contemplation I don’t like that it is applied as a blanket statement towards digital, because it isn’t an equation, that one equals the other But I have certainly seen it myself, a shutter drive blasting away on a flash card with comments to the effect of ‘I am sure I’ll get one good one in there.’ Being methodical can apply to any medium, and the medium doesn’t have to mean. sloppiness.
“They’ll never know what it was like. If it is the end, it will be a truly gigantic shame for future generations,” he says.”
. This made me think about how I started with 35 mm film, and I have shot Polaroids, but I didn’t really know what it was like for something like photographic plates or daguerrotypes It certainly would have been interesting to me to have shot on different formats, but I don’t really know if I feel any loss from it.
Digital instant prints are coming soon as a replacement from Polaroid, but I doubt we will see anything like Elsa’s camera in digital form anytime soon Can you imagine a digital sensor the size of that huge polaroid camera?! I think there will continue to be demand for instant prints Many travel photographers rely on polaroids for handing out prints as gifts to their subjects in remote places For me, I always feel that an image isn’t in its final resting place until it has been printed It is nice to see that perhaps the end of one era will be replaced by simply a different one – the tradition isn’t lost in the change of medium.
Read More
There is a fantastic conversation between several well known photographers, recently recorded into a podcast by George Jardine. The topic is basically many thoughts about archiving of photographs, our organization of them, and why. Jay Maisel, Greg Gorman, Seth Resnick and of course George all weigh in on the systems and philosophies they use (or lack thereof) to organize their images. It is a bit comforting to hear how even these guys are still trying to navigate through the complexities of keywording, image organization, digital archives, and applying some justification and rationale in how their images are cataloged.
I couldn’t agree more with their statements on how the best system is the one that works for you personally, not necessarily adoption of the system suggested by a book, a teacher, or even other pro photographers. Everyone has different objectives in mind, evident by each of these guys describing how they organize – and it is important that your system is a good fit with your objectives.
One very interesting thing they discuss at length, that often isn’t mentioned when it comes to image management, is the topic of legacy. For many of us as photographers, we can only hope when we are gone, some of our images will remain behind as perhaps a symbol of our contributions (however great or small) while we were here and what we enjoyed doing most. As a photographer approaching 40 (January folks – it’s coming soon – get the black balloons! 
) – I suppose the thought has crossed my mind a couple of times now that my life is for the most part, half over if I am lucky. In many ways, I think I have only started growing as a photographer. There are a few images I wouldn’t mind being remembered for if I should die tomorrow. How would anyone know which those are? Look for 5 stars? Certain colors? Of course, my contributions (as well as volume of work) to the photographic community and art form as a whole are tiny compared to these guys – but in general – the questions are the same.
These guys ask a key question – what images do you want to be remembered for, and how will anyone know that? Is it important that such a thing is built into whatever organizational system that you use? It is one thing to develop a system that works for you personally – it can change greatly if the perspective of usability by someone else is factored in. How will the system be accessed and utilized in 20, 30, 40 years? If you are a famous photographer in the art world or publication circuit, perhaps your most popular images are not necessarily your favorite images. I suppose your photographic assets need to be factored into your estate planning just as much as your financial assets. I doubt many of us will have a foundation to manage our photographs as mentioned in the podcast.
Software based image management has certainly helped greatly in managing digital files. Programs like Lightroom are wonderful tools for the here and now, when we need to access our OWN images. What about 40 or 100 years from now? The assumption of course is that whatever system is used, it is continually updated to grow with technology. How relevant will keywording be? Will the Internet be the ultimate archive? Is it too egotistical to think that any images will be of any historical significance or value whatsoever? It helps to know that we are not swimming alone in this digital revolution.
I know if I am dead and immediate family is gone, no one will be paying my web hosting fees, and the images on this site will disappear into the great cyber-trashcan. Even published images, unless in some book of historical significance, will be needles in a haystack. The prints I have sold will be around here and there – who knows exactly how many will exist over the next century. For the most part, I think general access to anyone’s image collection will be directly from where the originals are stored. Think about it though – of all the photographs ever taken over the past 100 years, how many do we actually have access to view? I think digital formats and the Internet will change this greatly. Perhaps we will see an emergence of public domain estate vaults?
Whatever your method of organization and archiving, it becomes very interesting to contemplate its scope when you change the perspective of time, and if someone else will be using it other than yourself. A big thanks to George Jardine and his colleagues for publishing a great conversation.
Read MoreSomething you didn’t know #2 . in a followup to my tagging to reveal things ‘you didn’t know’ – I thought it would be a good lead-in to simply refer you to a recent article at The Detroiter.com. . It is a nice article about Dispatch and the efforts and dedication of the founder. Dispatch is a local publication in Detroit that celebrates the work of poets, writers, and artists. The article reveals the relation to me.
Read MoreJust sharing an interesting link to a list over on Wikipedia. I don’t suppose I will ever understand why these images fetch the prices they do. I can understand some of them hold fairly significant historical reference, like one of the first color photographs. Ansel Adam’s Moonrise is on the list, and never struck me as one of his better images. But that isn’t what it is all about right?
Of course there is more tied to the price of these photographs than their asthetic appeal. And it has me thinking what types of images made today might make this pretigious list in 50 years or so. Of course, one of the prerequisites is you might have to die first. OK, we don’t want to explore that one further. At the top of the list, the photographer is still living. But what about the next great milestones in photographic history? Given we are in the dawn of the digital age, would the first digital image be one worth such noteriety? And how would one buy such a thing in 50 years? Just throw that flash card with the original up on the auction block?
I am curious as to what others think about this list, and if you want to take a guess at some future predictions just for fun.Â. Â. I can make an “Edition of One” version of any image on this site available for a meager bid of $500,000.Â. 
http://t.co/1xjuh7fT - posted on 23 hours ago
Follow Me on…