Originals? YouTube best, watching a Todd Hido lecture and the thought of the original came to me. Several years ago I sold an artists work in a cafe that I managed. One day a lady wanted to buy the original of the print. Explaining to the lady that the images were created in photoshop and there was no original, She could not understand this concept as there was a print in front of her. She wanted the original.
With photography is that the negative? the SD card?
This could be perceived as a difficult area. I could produce an image, importing the image from the SD card into Photoshop or Lightroom and create the final product. I could develop a film then process the negative with dodge and burn and other darkroom techniques such as pushing the processing or other chemicals. Where is the original in this process?
If the original is the SD card then I have destroyed most of my originals. With the analogue process of film if no processing is done I feel the negative is the original, however I feel that any photographer of note has changed the image in the dark room.
I can accept that anyone in the analogue could produce an original print as they have created it from the negative. This process would not lead to a repetitive duplication. This also slides down the question of originality.
I suppose the negative as the original would stop any photographer producing more of the image, but my SD card lost damaged or sold would not stop that once imported.
David Neaves passed away several years back. His art is widely disseminated in part through the cafe and his own website. This image is the Windswept Hare This is most probably the top-selling image. On his passing, his widow provided me with a USB drive of files to recover some of his art. He used a MAC so no access to it. I can replicate his work in the original form. I have the PSD. What’s the original?
A question all of us need to consider not we move into this digital space.
