New York Mary Ellen Mark at Aperture

[Calzone]

Tiny: Streetwise Revisited documents the life of a 13 year old girl who hits the streets, becomes a prostitute, becomes a drug addict, and eventually a mother of ten children.

The photography spans over 30 years and an ongoing relationship. The show runs till June 30th and is a big show.

Interesting to note the IQ. My forensics of the contact sheet (Kodak Safety Film 5063) denotes that Tri-X was used and that fine grain development was used. The cover image from the book is printed mighty big from a 35mm negative displays very well and is very remarkable.

Anyways I'll be going back for a second view. The reception became very-very crowded.

This is an important show and a must see.

Cal

 

[jsrockit]

I'll go see this tomorrow... thanks for the reminder.

 

[Calzone]

John,

This show is well put together considering how many decades it covers. The passage of time was not kind to Tiny, and she becomes unrecognizable.

For film shooters it will reinforce that all you need is Tri-X and some fine grain development skill. Both the shooting and the printing are displayed equally well.

My favorite print is the two kids with one hiding his face but sporting a 45 caliber hand gun. This show makes me happy that I still shoot film, and it adds an exclaimation point to waiting to wet print. The Silver wet prints really spoke to me via their smoothness.

Make sure you check the hours with the holiday weekend. For me this is an important show.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

A related exhibition at Howard Greenberg Gallery is "Attitude: 40 Portraits by Mary Ellen Mark."

Cal

 

[jsrockit]

And Kathy Ryan's NYT building iPhone photos are great too at Howard Greenberg.

 

[Calzone]

Went yesterday. Excellent exhibit.

Thanks for the heads up.

The Mary Ellen Mark show at Aperture is a really big show.

As always the opportunity to look at a contact sheet tells me a lot. Seems like she shoot a lot of frames to have a selection to edit from. This reinforces why I shoot a lot of film. Pretty much I do the same.

Also gotta love the IQ of the prints. Smooth and can be mistaken for Plus X instead of Tri-X.

There is also her husband's documentry film that I didn't get to see that requires that I have to go back.

Cal

 

[Timmyjoe]

Unfortunately I can't make it to New York before June 30th, but I'll pick up her book.

Cal, you mention she processed her Tri-X in a way that produced a grain structure like Plus-X, do you have any information on what chemicals she used or how her process worked?

Best,
-Tim

 

[Calzone]

This breathtaking work is on exhibit in NYC until June 30, 2016.

It is a document showing the dynamic of knowing your subject, not just the "opposite" of what we call "street," but certainly an intimate portrait, that should not be missed.

Fred,

From the Press Release: "Exhibition texts and captions are drawn from dialog in both films. The selection of prints for the exhibition was made by Mary Ellen Mark in collaboration with Bell and Aperture editor Melissa Harris before Mark's death on May 25, 2015."

This work is a great legacy.

Mary Ellen Mark's Husband's film "Streetwise" from 1984 was nominated for an Academy Award and is part of the show at Aperture.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

Unfortunately I can't make it to New York before June 30th, but I'll pick up her book.

Cal, you mention she processed her Tri-X in a way that produced a grain structure like Plus-X, do you have any information on what chemicals she used or how her process worked?

Best,
-Tim

Tim,

When I looked at the prints I believed that they were shot using a slow speed film due to the lack of grain, but in a showcase I took notice that the film she used was Kodak Safety Film 5063 which is Tri-X on a contact sheet that had the image used on the cover of the book.

Also there is this mural sized print that is a portrait of "Tiny" that hold up surprisingly well to massive enlargement. I was really surprised that the film used was Tri-X.

There is a lot to learn from this show. I'll be going back to dig in.

Anyone who still shoots film and sees this show will be encouraged to continue. Digital converts who abandoned film might be upset.

Cal

 

[jsrockit]

Digital converts who abandoned film might be upset.

I'm sure I'll be fine. More interested in the content than the film used.

 

[cz23]

....Anyone who still shoots film and sees this show will be encouraged to continue. Digital converts who abandoned film might be upset.

Cal

Whenever I see a show like this, usually at the Art Institute of Chicago or the CCP in Tucson, I get all nostalgic for film. Whatever we shoot, let's all admit, when done well it's magical.

But then I consider the processing chain and level of mastery required to attain the caliber of results on display. Then I'm bummed. I can't do that, nor can I put in the time try. So I go back to my MM and its 1s and 0s. Darn good. Even good enough. But just not the same.

John

 

[Calzone]

Whenever I see a show like this, usually at the Art Institute of Chicago or the CCP in Tucson, I get all nostalgic for film. Whatever we shoot, let's all admit, when done well it's magical.

But then I consider the processing chain and level of mastery required to attain the caliber of results on display. Then I'm bummed. I can't do that, nor can I put in the time try. So I go back to my MM and its 1s and 0s. Darn good. Even good enough. But just not the same.

John

John,

Well said.

BTW I also shoot a MM so I know what you mean.

I have been making mucho negatives without any regard to printing, but know that one day I will have the time to wet print and get that magic you speak of. You are correct in that it takes dedication and time. No scanning for me.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

I'm sure I'll be fine. More interested in the content than the film used.

John,

I admire both (content and film), but also I appreciate both mediums.

Cal

 

[jsrockit]

I admire both (content and film), but also I appreciate both mediums.

A lot of my favorite photographers used film... so I do appreciate it considerably. However, it's a different time and I like using a different method. It's all good to me. Maybe if I didn't prefer color, I would feel differently (though about 15-20% of my semi-finished images are B&W these days).

I guess if I tried to emulate every process I liked when viewing photos in galleries, books, and museums, I'd be running around like a chicken with its head cut off (and would have to own a 8x10" camera). In the end, you just have to use what works for you.

 

[Calzone]

A lot of my favorite photographers used film... so I do appreciate it considerably. However, it's a different time and I like using a different method. It's all good to me. Maybe if I didn't prefer color, I would feel differently (though about 15-20% of my semi-finished images are B&W these days).

I guess if I tried to emulate every process I liked when viewing photos in galleries, books, and museums, I'd be running around like a chicken with its head cut off (and would have to own a 8x10" camera). In the end, you just have to use what works for you.

John,

If I were a color photographer I would clearly be following in your footsteps.

Not all shows inspire me or give me a lesson.

Cal

 

[jsrockit]

I'm going to check it out today and will post my thoughts. She's always been top notch though...so I'm sure it'll be great. I wasn't THAT impressed by the Howard Greenburg show, but... it's still great work.

 

[Calzone]

I'm going to check it out today and will post my thoughts. She's always been top notch though...so I'm sure it'll be great. I wasn't THAT impressed by the Howard Greenburg show, but... it's still great work.

John,

Check the schedule before going. Not sure about a holiday schedule.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

Marks often used professional printers. She was quite generous in giving credit to the professional printers she worked with. Sarah Jenkins, Sal Lopes two greats who printed for her.

I have never personally printed work for show, I have printed B&W for other photographers when I was young, and learned I have no talent or interest in printing.

There are many photographers, like me, who should not print, we just ruin photographs. 🙂

Fred,

Nothing wrong with letting pros do what they do best.

Not many people like W.Eugene Smith who was a master of both printing and shooting.

Anyways it pays to be humble.


Cal

 

[jsrockit]

Not many people like W.Eugene Smith who was a master of both printing and shooting.

And even he had help...

http://petapixel.com/2015/01/26/w-eugene-smith-considered-darkroom-work-90-photos-creation-process/

 

[Calzone]

And even he had help...

http://petapixel.com/2015/01/26/w-eugene-smith-considered-darkroom-work-90-photos-creation-process/

John,

Thanks for sharing this.

My understanding of history makes me believe that the Pittsburg work was very important to Gene, in the end it caused him to be blacklisted, even though he was a celebrated and famous photographer.

The disappointment that resulted caused "The Jazz Loft" period and a downward spiral.

It is said that Gene wanted editorial control over this work and control over these images is what destroyed him.

Nice to see that at the Aperture show there was a good collaboration.

Cal