Two prints

[Nas]

Work print of a shot I made down in Dorset (can't remember the name of the exact place) in-between one of the lockdowns in 2020. Made on a Speed Graphic 5x4 with the 135mm standard lens which came with it. Can't remember which film but it would have been expired. This is a 5x7 print on Ilford MG RC Satin. I don't really like the low contrast you get on satin paper so I'm just using it up. I bought a box of satin, pearl and glossy to see which surface I liked the best.


This is a contact print of a 5"x7" glass plate neg. Can't remember where I got this neg, most likely in a mixed box of stuff from auction. Anyone want to guess when this might have been shot? I like the camera on the tripod with spindly legs and how happy everyone looks.

 

[Helen Summers]

Very much like the composition and subject of the first image. For me, the softness of the image works nicely given a sense of a warm early Autumn day. Its a pity you don't have the , Who, What, When, Why and Where info as it always adds interest to an image.

James Ravillious and Roger Deacons photos in the Beaford archive demonstrate this perfectly. Ravillious's photos have the full background info whereas many of Deacon's don't. Cosequently Ravillious"s photos are more interesting and relatable to.

 

[Kevin Allan]

The clothing worn in the group shot suggests 1950's I think.

 

[Ian Grant]

The clothing worn in the group shot suggests 1950's I think.

I copied a photo for an Aunt a few years ago, of her and her best friend on Blackpool Pier in 1946, very similar clothes. So post WII to early 1950s.

Ian

 

[Nas]

Very much like the composition and subject of the first image. For me, the softness of the image works nicely given a sense of a warm early Autumn day. Its a pity you don't have the , Who, What, When, Why and Where info as it always adds interest to an image.

James Ravillious and Roger Deacons photos in the Beaford archive demonstrate this perfectly. Ravillious's photos have the full background info whereas many of Deacon's don't. Cosequently Ravillious"s photos are more interesting and relatable to.

Thanks. I've read the book on Ravillious which his wife wrote and enjoyed it very much. I do sometimes keep notes but I have more than one notebook on the go and the notes usually are separate from the negs. Not ideal I must admit. It probably comes down to me just enjoying the journey of making images and not planning on the final destination as being a book or exhibition where I would need to add details.

 

[Alan Clark]

Or it could be that Ravilious's photographs are more interesting and relateable to because he was a better photographer.

 

[Helen Summers]

Or it could be that Ravilious's photographs are more interesting and relateable to because he was a better photographer.

That’s probably it, but for me the extra info does add to the interest which is a bit strange I suppose, because I still don’t know the locations. or people in the photos. It just makes them more relevant some how. I now add this info to the back of my prints as I know collectors of old photos like to have it. Hopefully it might just save some of them from ending up in a skip when I m gone.

 

[David M]

I suppose the interest in photographs of people must shift over time. Firstly, it must be recognition of the subjects by people who know them personally - “ (Oh look, it’s Auntie Marie and cousin Jim. As time moves on, the image becomes a sociological and historic document - “Did they really wear shoes like that? That building has been demolished.”
…and so on.
I’m currently scanning some old family photographs and this has been my experience.