TALES FROM THE PEANUT GALLERY 1

Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 23:45:51 -0400

From: boris@xxxxxxxxx  (Boris Starosta)

To: photo-3d@calcite.rocky.edu

Subject: P3D Re: Shaking the norm?... Yeah, sure!

From: "Dr. George A. Themelis"

<DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxx>

...

>And then Boris comes and talks about HIS alternative content images!

>Ha, ha, ha!!!  Give me a break! :-)  I just came back for

Detroit.

....

>light and a bunch of hands flashed all around her.  Plus, he got ALL

>acceptances.  Best record than anybody else.  And it is not just Detroit.

>Exhibition after exhibition, Boris is rounding up all the awards.

>

>So who is shaking what norm?  The guy (Boris) is being accepted with

>open arms by the stereo photographic establishment!!!! :-)

They

>love his work!  Come on Boris!  You can do better than that!!!  Show

>us some really disturbing images.  Get zero acceptances from the

>establishment.  Only then you will be a real ARTIST!!! :-) :-)

Real ARTISTS don't have to be fools.  I'm through with all that!

George, I can see the twinkle in your eye, and I appreciate your Friendly ribbing.  But you make the unwarranted assumption that it is my "alternative content" images winning those awards.  Let me tell you a little secret:  I'm not sending my best work (the ART-work, that is) to these exhibitions.  Why?  You already know the answer - I'm not going to waste my time.

But that doesn't mean I don't want to exhibit my best work.  No. To see the ART-work, you must come to MY exhibition, currently showing here in Charlottesville.  The PSA would have none of it, believe me.  Or you could go to the EXPLORA museum in Frankfurt, which just bought five of  my anaglyph prints for their collection; or the Stern Stunde gallery in Bielefeld, which is now selling my erotic prints and slides.  Before the year is out, I will have put these new works on my website as well.

Don't misunderstand.  I'm proud of winning the PSA awards this year.  I'm proud of the images that are taking the awards.  That's because these are images that I meticulously crafted to favorably impress PSA judges (some of the judges), as I've come to discover what the PSA is all about these past two years.

But even more importantly, these images do go beyond the PSA norm.  As I'm fond of saying in my catalog: "no animals, flowers, or scenics!"  I think even you will agree that it is unusual to gain a high PSA award on an image that does not focus on one of these three themes. 

(footnote section omitted)

Cheers,

Boris

 ------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 00:17:03 -0400

From: boris@xxxxxxxxx (Boris Starosta)

To: photo-3d@calcite.rocky.edu

Subject: P3D Re: Alternatives

>From: Bruce Springsteen <bsspringsteen@xxxxxxx>

...

>of art, stereographers the neglected step-children of photography, erotic

>stereo-windowless dung-flinging anaglyphic medium-format stereo innovators

>can't get shown at 3D meetings, ad infinitum I suppose.

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, HAA, HAA, HAAA!!!

I've never laughed so hard being put in my place!

Thanks Bruce!

P.S. These discussions may in fact be off-topic for the list, but they sure are interesting, entertaining, and educational!

-----------

Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 00:20:59 EDT

From: JVapor7@xxxxxxxx

To: photo-3d@calcite.rocky.edu

Subject: P3D How Much Is That Doggie In The Window?  The One With The...

In a message dated 10/15/99 3:42:50 AM,

photo-3d@calcite.rocky.edu writes:

<< Those stereo pairs of your dog's crank are no longer "cool"

anymore >>

But the real question, Mark, is were they done with an RBT or a Realist??:

Can we end this tiresome discussion of 'art' and talk about 3D?

I take nudes, I show 'em to people.  Some like 'em, others don't.  Big deal.

Yip, Yip

J

PS.  I'll pass on the pooch shots but I'd still like to see how Mr Dottle looks in his sister's dress.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 15 Oct 1999 12:50:08 -0400

From: Thom Gillam <ThomGillam@xxxxxxxxxx>

To: photo-3d@calcite.rocky.edu

Subject: P3D Re: PHOTO-3D digest 3549

Bruce (Give me one of everything, please.) Springsteen wrote:

> ... erotic

> stereo-windowless dung-flinging anaglyphic medium-format stereo innovators...

> Bruce,  I wish you hadn't mentioned me in this discussion!

:^):^):^)

------------------------------

                                        PHOTO-3D Digest 3648

------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 19:39:32 PST

From: "Xal razutis" <razutis@xxxxxxx>

To: photo-3d@calcite.rocky.edu

Subject: P3D Re: Quarrels about "Art"

There have been arguments that 'prescribe' (what is, what is not art) and arguments that describe intent, process, context, and meaning (of art). All of this is valuable, though my (personal) interests are in descriptive analysis since I have developed an aversion for all forms of prescriptive (rule-bound) dogma.

Sergio Baldissara wrote (presumably) 'on behalf' of Italians:

>"May be in Italy we are fed by

>discussions about "art" since in the cradle, but I don't care any more

>about

>"what" is art, or "what" an artist should do.

Fine. A personal statement that also presumes to speak for an Entire nation.......

So, let's see if this will test-fly: 'In LOS ANGELES WE ARE FED UP WITH ANY DISCUSSION OF ART....since ENTERTAINMENT and THEME PARKS and BOX-OFFICE SUCCESS is all WE really CARE ABOUT.'

'We'?  'Art?'

Fortunately, this type of argument has never flown beyond the  publicists and their various insistences of what is 'THE GREATEST', 'FABULOUS','YOU GOTTA SEE THIS', and other advertisements ('theory-practice of the lie') which have infected our North American culture and now are considered 'normal practice' resulting in SUCCESS and big-bucks.

You don't see histories of 'advertisement slogans' (yet); you do, however, see histories of art of all kinds (of all times, cultures, sacred, non-sacred, and those that UPSET the 'status quo').

And Oleg Vorobyoff wrote:

>I know this thread should be left to die.  But there is one important

>thing, I believe, that has not been explicitly said.  That is that art

>is a process, not an isolated thing.

Well, the responses posted so far prove very well that art can never be isolated from the context within which it is received. Even  if it is received by people who don't read carefully and prefer to term this author a 'jerk'.

The various responses to Rod Sage's post (mine included) offered Contrasting views, arguments, additional insights.  Some sought to trivialize the term 'art' (yuk, yuk, yuk), presumably because the authors thought this practice to be 'worthless' in light of the subtleties of the various geometries, optics, and camera technologies repeatedly discussed.

I wrote some months ago that a technological art form (like 3D) will always feature a tug of war between technology and aesthetics.

'Holographic Art', from the 70's on, was similarly afflicted, with technical holograms (mimetic representation of objects) standing in as 'art' by 'scientists' and exhibited alongside works by 'artists'.  Thing was, that the scientists kept arguing for 'higher diffraction efficiency' while artists were trying to blend holography with sculpture, with painting, with historical referents.

Did this result in a unified art form?  Only if you think a Embossed hologram of a toy appearing as a corn-flakes give-away card  is 'art'.....

To think for a minute that "art" of 3D is something that does NOT BELONG on this list would be to prescribe what we SHOULD discuss, and SHOULD NOT discuss. Or, HOW we should discuss this, or when it 'should be left to die'.

Those kinds of pronouncements fly in the face of why art is produced, 'without permission' granted by various authorities and cogniscenti, various hobbyists, and those interested in 'other' stuff.

As long as we want to understand how meaning is generated, modified, codified (as 'art') and transmitted (by 'culture') the task of discussing - and quarreling about - art will continue.

And it should have a place on this list, even if the gloves have to come off.

There are some of us - myself included - that value the relevance of this term, how it translates into 'value', how it is redefined by generations, how distinctions are created, and by whom.

The 'art' of 3D photography, 3D motion-pictures and video, 3D computer graphics is something that is being re-born as we proceed into the next millennium.

To dismiss it or bury it under vague generalities, to reduce it to the status of a purely 'subjective' (I like, I don't like) quality is to deny its place in a trans-personal culture that we ourselves (the producers of images, the conveyors of meaning) participate in.

The quarrels will continue, since the substance is always mutable, hanging, and threatening that very 'status quo' that attempts to contain it.

And some of us actually try to make a 'living' doing just that.... contemporary art.

Al Razutis

-------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 00:51:44 EST

From: Rehotshots@xxxxxxxx

To: photo-3d@calcite.rocky.edu

Subject: P3D Re: Subtle jabs I can abide; blantant disrespect I cannot !

I would like to apologize to Sergio and anyone else that I have offended with my inflamed response to This Man's comments.  If we cannot accept the fact that we all have limitations, no matter how many or how few letters we have behind our name, how will we ever grow spiritually or intellectually or creatively or allow others to do so?  I consider a person who has so little respect for the individual as to point them out by name and insult them as a very dangerous person.  I don't like to see the human spirit squashed as if it were a roach.  When that happens it is time to exterminate the exterminator.  Disasters can be prevented by using dynamite and fires can be put out with fire.  O.K., so maybe we created this monster ourselves with our own brand of disrespect, but when the monster is out of control and is attacking and attempting to  destroy everyone in its path, do we stop to consider the pain the monster has suffered or do we focus on stopping the monster in his tracks?    All monsters are man made and in stopping them we become monsters.  The antidote is respect. You don't have to like me.  You don't have to agree with me.  But, you  absolutely must respect me or you will get no  respect from me.  Fair?

I actually found the content of This Man's  postings interesting and I do intend to visit his website, eventually, when I get over this sensation of being mowed down, which is exactly how I felt every time he insulted one of you, whether I agreed with you or not. I refer to this person as This Man for two reasons:

not to further humiliate him in front of those who have no idea of what I am talking about and not to immortalize him with a martyrdom that I feel he does not deserve.

Beg your forgiveness,

Teri

------------------------------

Do You Yahoo!?

NEXT PAGE E*MOTI*CUFS