amateriat
We're all light!
I just read this review, and started to think about things like image over-saturation, the ever-lowering bar for PJ work (with some brilliant exceptions), and the synapse-cracking permeation of electronically-delivered images. What did it take to create a print publication that could hold your attention in the 1960s? What would it take now (assuming anything at all would work)?
When Look came back in the 1980s, I snapped up every issue. It was (almost) up to the same standard as I recalled from years past. (The cover with Nelson Rockefeller still sits in my mind vividly. That's what a good photo should do, maybe not always, but more often than not.)
And, this exhibit goes on the shortlist, right behind the Robert Frank at the Guggenheim.
- Barrett
When Look came back in the 1980s, I snapped up every issue. It was (almost) up to the same standard as I recalled from years past. (The cover with Nelson Rockefeller still sits in my mind vividly. That's what a good photo should do, maybe not always, but more often than not.)
And, this exhibit goes on the shortlist, right behind the Robert Frank at the Guggenheim.
- Barrett
Last edited: