> I wonder how much of Adams' work is underappreciated by not seeing the > original prints, but only seeing it on posters on office walls, or > perhaps on the web. Kind of like watching Star Wars via VHS on a 12" > CRT TV in 2000, versus watching it in the theater in July 1977. > > -- > Larry Colen [email protected] (from dos4est)
I've seen his work in original prints, and I think he's over-rated. That doesn't mean I think he's bad or that I don't like his stuff, it means I think he's over-rated. I note that few people have seen originals of Leonardo da Vinci, Botticelli, Rembrandt, Vermeer, Turner, Picasso, Monet, Hopper, Cartier-Bresson, or the exotic woman draped over the branch of a tree, but they don't seem to be underappreciated. It seems like special pleading when people say you have to see the originals of Adams' work, especially when his estate exerts such tight control over the quality of the printing in his books and posters. I have some of his books, and they are excellently printed. It suggests to me that the technical qualities are seen as more important than the 'art', and that may be why he doesn't receive the attention from the art establisment that some people think he deserves. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
