hi charles- oh...i dunno. i thought the blurry b&w series looked like something the referenced early photographic processes. maybe i'm so dumbed down by the digital i can't tell anymore...
But iphone is a capture device.... not a print, which is what any sort of "type" is, right? Even a wet plate colloidion neg, if printed w/ say, a platinum process (or a cyanotype, or a VanDyke or...) , would still be a platinotype. Could you call it a call it a collodionplatinotype? Would this be an iphonotype?
I don't know what the hell I'm saying. Is this even English?
4 comments:
...?
Sorry but I don't see what you mean there...
hi charles-
oh...i dunno. i thought the blurry b&w series looked like something the referenced early photographic processes. maybe i'm so dumbed down by the digital i can't tell anymore...
But iphone is a capture device.... not a print, which is what any sort of "type" is, right? Even a wet plate colloidion neg, if printed w/ say, a platinum process (or a cyanotype, or a VanDyke or...) , would still be a platinotype. Could you call it a call it a collodionplatinotype? Would this be an iphonotype?
I don't know what the hell I'm saying. Is this even English?
chirp.
iphonotype makes sense :-P
What are the specificities of phone photos?
Post a Comment