tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post7704932205917670553..comments2023-08-22T06:37:59.379-04:00Comments on nonfigurativephoto: A look into Martha Casanave's worlddcollinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13211802069564554414noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-92017806653132385362016-11-25T16:22:06.969-05:002016-11-25T16:22:06.969-05:00Her work is very great, and very moving. I am a ph...Her work is very great, and very moving. I am a photography student at a community college. I was given an assignment from my instructor to write and show a sampling of her work. But, she has chosen to omit her early life. very hard to write about a person when she has omitted parts of her life. Now I understand privacy, but the minute she went public with her work, she became public also!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09005343143806647999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-90244343696107457402015-03-10T20:48:44.206-04:002015-03-10T20:48:44.206-04:00Hi Nolan, it's good to hear from you.
I rem...Hi Nolan, it's good to hear from you. <br /><br />I remind you that we've encouraged readers to have a look at your cliché-verres (I'll use the English plural) from 1979 and later, which are very graphic indeed, and it's easy to see how someone looking for something to do with soot could be attracted to them. As I recall in fact, Martha was interested in using the method as a teaching tool in her alt photography classes, and perhaps I should have mentioned that in the post to make that quite clear. <br /><br />As for the aesthetics of the matter and whether or not Martha may have unconsciously 'copied your style' or not, I'll leave for others to decide. I should point out however that if one has a piece of sooted glass, the higher you let the drop fall - oil, water, solvent, whatever - the greater its splash through the sooty matrix and the more likely you are to achieve dramatic effects, which may become further heightened on enlargement. This leads to the observation that, on first order as the scientists say, all high-falling drops onto soot look roughly the same. So there could be a kind of aesthetic convergence here between your earlier work and Martha's. But the aesthetic issue, which I consider moot, frankly, is different from the issue of who was the first one to use the method.<br /><br />I do have in my files several images from the 1930s and 1940s that appear to show, without description, the effect of alcohol on soot. I'd be happy to send them to you. To complete the picture (but we're going a bit far afield here) I also have images from what I believe are the first modern users of corn syrup and asphaltum on glass, both sooted and not - again, if you're interested. As in many things it's not who was first, it's what those who came later did with it. Glassprints were patented in 1839 in London by men who today are all but forgotten. But Kepes is not forgotten, nor Corot, nor Picasso, and all of them at one time were glassprinters (or cliché-verrers).<br />dcollinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13211802069564554414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-59540174185581226102015-03-10T14:30:05.058-04:002015-03-10T14:30:05.058-04:00A colleague alerted me to this post. To the best ...A colleague alerted me to this post. To the best of my knowledge, the specific cliché-verre process that I began working with in 1979, i.e., solvents dripped on smoke-on-glass to create a matrix that is then printed with an enlarger on photographic paper, was not described prior to my 2010 publications. In 2001, I bought the beautiful book “Cliché-verre: Hand-Drawn, Light-Printed, A Survey of the Medium from 1839 to the Present” 1980, that is cited by Doug. It was listed as a rare book at that time. The receipt order # was 27947406 from Barnes and Noble purchased June 1, 2001 and cost me $121.44, used. I immediately read it from cover to cover. I was surprised to find that my cliché-verre process of dripping solvents on smoke-on-glass to create a matrix, was not described, mentioned or shown in this entire book. The book goes into some detail on 82 different artists varying with bios, working concepts and techniques used to produce their pieces. Many of the major artists that are named as working with a smoke-on-grass process in this blog are covered in this book. I have recently gone through the book again and reached the same conclusion – I had stumbled onto a unique process in 1979. <br />I told Martha Casanave about this book in 2011 in an email discussion. There are certain visual characteristics to the work that I create using this process that could be called “style” and now Martha Casanave has created work that imitates this individual “style.” <br />Over the years other colleagues have researched this cliché-verre process trying to find out how I did it. One was an exceptional researcher and he asked me one day, “Nolan, how did you do this. I have not been able to find it anywhere!” I told him I wanted to publish it before I would discuss it further which I did in 2010. Granted, search engines are much better today than they were even in 2001. I have not found works by Moholy-Nagy, Gyorgy Kepes, Heinz Hajek-Halke, Carl-Heinz Chargesheimer or the Bauhaus in the above book or elsewhere that use this specific process. Doug, if you have information on where this work was published prior to my 2010 articles, please cite exact description references and post exact works. I am happy that individuals are using this process; however, it is professional courtesy to cite the individuals who have been instrumental in developing and publishing it. Nolan Preecehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13098114986008159454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-38605288447181605242015-03-03T02:07:49.176-05:002015-03-03T02:07:49.176-05:00What you say is very true - that Nolan Preece was ...What you say is very true - that Nolan Preece was creating work along roughly similar lines as early as 1979, using the same classic methods (soot, alcohol). Others were doing this even earlier, for instance Kepes and the Bauhaus crowd in the 1930s. This vein of soot-and-alcohol abstraction reached a peak in my estimation - this is admittedly personal - with Chargesheimer's so-called light-drawings of the late 1940s. Much of the history of these materials and methods is recounted in Glass & Symmes' excellent Cliché-Verre: Hand-Drawn, Light-Printed, 1980. In discussing Casanave's prints from 2012 we wanted simply to highlight a little-known facet of the overall accomplishment of this West Coast photographer and place it in an historical context, taking a synoptic view of processes.<br />Thanks for reminding us of Nolan's cliché-verres, which are definitely worth taking a look at for those not yet familiar with them.dcollinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13211802069564554414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-55392563050029530342015-03-02T17:58:34.696-05:002015-03-02T17:58:34.696-05:00Readers might like to know that this technique was...Readers might like to know that this technique was published by Nolan Preece in Photo Technique Magazine (2010) and in Silvershotz: The International Journal of Fine Art Photography (2010). Martha Casanave’s images are very similar to those dating back to 1979 on Preece’s website. Both articles and his website reference and describe the same cliché-verre process. Also, in perusing this website, Nonfigurativephoto, I see that it was described here on December 2, 2011. Both the artist and website editor may want to reference Nolan Preece when describing this process.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-80822325007586578282015-02-28T11:15:10.736-05:002015-02-28T11:15:10.736-05:00You're right that cliché-verre is photography,...You're right that cliché-verre is photography, but only in the original sense of exposing photosensitive paper, with something on it - a drawing, an object - to light. Once the camera was attached to it, photography became more what you saw, not what you made. It was painters and graphic artists who appropriated the original sense of photography for their own ends, and it has consequently had a different evolution. Because of that, cliché-verre is perhaps better thought of as part of painting, and the galleries most inclined to show it would be painting or drawing venues. Nonetheless, it is taught in many photography departments in universities because it utilizes the materials of photography and demonstrates that the lens, in a sense, is extraneous: a teaching point is made. A good question Steve, and one that torments many practitioners.dcollinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13211802069564554414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-28273393037326073882015-02-26T01:26:59.480-05:002015-02-26T01:26:59.480-05:00This does seem like rich turf for making art, and ...This does seem like rich turf for making art, and you are right, the Casanave pictures are remarkable. I'm puzzled however by the lack of interest in this technique by the galleries and tastemakers, or have I missed something? Is it because this is 'photography', while photography itself has gone in a different direction?Steve Brandesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3058180378437995577.post-34459430655701151912015-02-25T22:19:49.675-05:002015-02-25T22:19:49.675-05:00Complimenti per questi bellissimi quadri ! Mille ...Complimenti per questi bellissimi quadri ! Mille graziePaoloBnoreply@blogger.com