[Frameworks] High-definition frame grabs

[Chuck Kleinhans]

Amen to Dave Tetzlaff’s remarks .

And in response to an earlier comment about (thankfully a small number)  critics who act like royal jerks—point well made.

I have two further mall thoughts.

1.   I personally have never thought that illustrations for a critical essay are anything but an “aide-memoire”—a note, a sketch to help the reader of the essay imagine or remember what the critic is describing.  The critical essay can never be mistaken for the actual viewing of the original.  (There are many variations of this for scholars/critics.  I used to ask students if they had seen the original Star Wars and when they said yes questioned them further if they saw it in its original 70mm format, and if not if they could really say they had seen/experienced it.  Was a 16mm print of a 35mm film ever an adequate representation of the original?  Was a VHS or DVD edition ever adequate. BTW, at one point you could actually buy a Stan Brakhage approved WHS copy of Dog Star Man.)

2.  I think that those artists closest to the big time art market are often much more concerned with high quality reproductions, which are after all one of the hallmarks of the art book trade.  I think it’s a good thing that the Warhol Foundation, say, tries to control the quality of the reproductions available in various formats (art print, poster, coffee mug, etc.).  And most of the time high end international exhibitions have really nice illustrated catalogues for the show as it travels from major museum to major museum.

But the lowly critical essay in a journal, newspaper, or even art magazine is trying for something different  than giving someone a nice coffee table book memorializing that show they attended at the Met, or the Tate, or whatever.  (Snarky remark abut Millenmium edited out.)



Chuck Kleinhans