This was really informative. Thanks for keeping the discussion open to the group!
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of WingedGriffinStudios
Sent: Friday, May 1, 2020 5:05 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [MUSEUM-L] Touching up historic photos for exhibit
***** CAUTION: This email originated from an outside source. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know they are safe. *****
Christian,
This has been an interesting discussion and one that will become increasingly important as we continue to work with digital materials. I agree with your comments, however, I don’t want you to misinterpret mine. Your general comments provide proper caution; mine were to provide a specific example where a touch up might be beneficial.
Had these images been photographs by an identified photographer for an art exhibition, I agree with you that a "touch up" would be unfortunate. However, both these photographs are anonymous images used to illustrate a historical story printed on an interpretive panel. Their use is primarily for identification and documentation. In other words, the exhibit was about the woman in question and the landscape descriptive of the environs. In both cases, the public benefits from a clearer image of the person and place. Darkening the photo using photoshop is much like leaving the print in the developer for a few more seconds to bring out the detail that was already there. I think, in this case, the “touch up” is appropriate.
Anna Fariello
Curatorial InSight
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 11:03:47 +0200
> From: C. Müller-Straten <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Touching up historic photos for exhibit
>
> Hi Anna,
>
> first of all, my remarks were classified as general. Turning to
> specific examples, you can always mention examples which would allow
> some photoshopping (interpretation). I agree with you regarding cropping.
> Here in Germany, an importing discussion started with the books of P.B.
> Eipper and Anton Murrer on original frames and the attitude of
> publishing houses and museums to crop paintings and reproduce them
> without their original frames selected by the artists.
>
> By the way: We are doing a lot of photoshopping in case of private
> author's portraits, for example in case of color reflections or flash
> reflections in eye glasses. But this belongs, more or less, to the
> mentioned category "private albums". We do this with extreme caution -
> and never received any reclamation by our authors - if they have
> noticed that at all.
>
>
> Your case is different. You invented 2 eyes instead of 2 white dots in
> "a poor portrait photograph." If you had to use this photograph for an
> exhibition at all (no alternatives?), it had not been for the sake of
> art of it, but for its documentary character. My approach is clear:
> Part of this historic document is its poor artistic character, which
> is to be saved. To transform such a poor source into a acceptable work
> of art, creates a new source by you, the photoshop artist.
>
> To darken a landscape ads a dramatic touch to it which apparently was
> not the intention of the photographer. In the end, you changed the
> source into a respectable work of art, worth exhibiting as
> photographic art, but you created a new source which documents your
> own freedom, your casual bona fide way of dealing with the work of
> others. My conclusion would be different, of course, if you had the
> permission or order by the originator.
>
> Museums, in general, deal with originals. If museums have to refer to
> "poor" originals, please let them remain poor originals. Their
> poorness is a fact, and part of their source character.
>
> Best
>
>
> Christian
> Am 25.04.2020 um 18:28 schrieb WingedGriffinStudios:
>> So much of this discussion, like so much of museum work, is open to interpretation. The recent news of removing text from demonstration placards because they were offensive brought this practice to current discussion. That instance--of a museum’s removing critical information from a photograph--should not be practiced or tolerated. But it should not be confused with other means of “touching up” that might not be so egregious. I recently created an exhibit panel that included a poor landscape and poor portrait photograph. Using photoshop, I “touched up” a woman’s eyes so that they were visible and not just two bright dots in her face. I also darkened a landscape to bring out background detail. In these cases, touching up is not removing critical information and, in fact, sometimes brings out details that were not visible in the original print. And then of course there is cropping, another form of photo manipulation.
>> Anna Fariello
>> Curatorial InSight
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 24, 2020, at 12:00 AM, MUSEUM-L automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> There is 1 message totaling 206 lines in this issue.
>>>
>>> Topics of the day:
>>>
>>> 1. Touching up historic photos for exhibit
>>>
>>> =========================================================
>>> Important Subscriber Information:
>>>
>>> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
>>>
>>> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> --
>>>
>>> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 06:08:54 +0200
>>> From: C. Müller-Straten <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Subject: Re: Touching up historic photos for exhibit
>>>
>>> Hi Lisa,
>>>
>>> as we do not know the reasons why your exhibit designer intents to
>>> do so, here are my general remarks.
>>>
>>> A museum is an institution of trust. Each historic photograph is
>>> both, a work of art and a document.
>>>
>>> 1) Touching up or changing historical documents to make them appear
>>> "when new" is not a good idea for a museum. An historical document
>>> like a photograph should never be treated this way because all signs
>>> of time are part of the document. There is only one exemption: The
>>> duties of a conservator. It is not the duty of a conservator to make
>>> the object look like new. This idea is one of the past.
>>>
>>> 2) It is an illusion to think that such a reconstruction of "the"
>>> original state can be done by an exhibit designer. An exhibit
>>> designer should respect the documentary character of each object!
>>> Additionally, these persons are neither specialists in the history
>>> of photographs, nor a conservator who, under certain conditions, may come close to it.
>>> Generations of artists, conservators, and art historians changed
>>> paintings believing that they would reconstruct the original look of
>>> a picture. But they created another new look, not the old.
>>>
>>> 3) There are some digital tricks nowadays to change a source into
>>> this direction which are marketed by developers of software like
>>> photoshop, but scientists and museums should restrain from these
>>> tools because this opens the door to fakes. These tools may be good
>>> for family albums, but not for an institution of trust.
>>>
>>> 4) If a museum omits to mention such "reconstructions" in detail in
>>> catalogues or objects descriptions, it puts itself in jeopardy to be
>>> called a counterfeiter.
>>>
>>> 4) Last but not least: The idea of your exhibit designer to alter
>>> some sources, others not, may deceive visitors, if not explained in detail.
>>>
>>> Hope that helps.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>>
>>> Christian Mueller-Straten
>>>
>>> (Editor of MUSEUM AKTUELL, EXPOTIME! and author of "Fälschungserkennung"
>>> [Fake detection], member of ICOM Germany)
>>>
>>>
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
