Why gelatin silver print is a valuable form of art?
Sometimes in the art world and amongst the collectors you hear people wondering about value of a photographic work in comparison to other art forms. Truth is that when photography was born around 1839 (the invention was made earlier but it came to known for the larger public when Mr. Daguerre presented it for the Academy in France). it wasn’t considered as a form of art in the first place.
The role of a technical instrument in art was considered at first questionable. The result, as was thought back then, didn’t mirror the skill of the person using the instrument but the instrument itself, which was able to record an image of the world so perfectly. In the beginning photography was considered as a useful tool for science and research.
As the time passed, the world of art opened also for photography. Fairly quickly was understood that there was some artistic vision actually needed to produce the pictures taken by the machine.
Photography was seen as a form of art fairly soon in France, UK and United States, but in Finland the path was slower. Photography was important media, especially for the newspapers, but even in the 1970’s you may find articles where the question was posed: Is photography really art? (If interested in the history oif photography in Finland, I warmly recommend reading the works by researcher Leena Saraste. Unfortunately in Finnish only: Valokuva – Muisto, viesti taide, Musta Taide, 2010; Valokuva tradition ja toden välissä, Musta Taide, 1996 jaValokuva, pakenevan todellisuuden kuvajainen, Kirjayhtymä, 1980).
In the course of the 1980’s photography secured its place as a part of the arts in Finland too. The young age still reflects in the interest of the collectors: when comparing the art purchases made in Finland the vast majority of artworks bought are oil paintings, then etchings and similar handmade gravure works. Photographs are mostly bough by museums. (Source: Pauliina Laitinen-Laiho 2011: Miten sijoitan taiteeseen – Mistä taideteoksen arvo muodostuu. Helsinki: Minerva).
In the beginning of the 2000’s the digital photography mixed it all up again. In Finland the public had just gotten used to the idea that photography may indeed be art when a whole new variable was introduced; digital computer made image and machine printing. Now the discussion, well known from the wake of photography, started again and the question rose: “Can a computer made photography be art?”
Swift evolution of the digital cameras and phone cameras led also to the discussion of the meaning of art and artists in the society. In Finland the meaning of university education has been traditionally valued high. We have here top quality free universities, the combination which has been stated impossible in many other countries. The change in the field and the fact that anyone can call themselves a photographic artist, has sparked a lively discussion about meaning and basis of the art education in general.
Digital photography has also changed the media what comes to its uses. Warmly recommend to read (in Finnish) reseracher-artist Merja Salo’s wonderful book on the change of the field in Finland: Jokapaikan valokuva – Suomalaisen valokuvauksen digitalisoituminen 1992–2005, Aalto Arts Books& Musta Taide, 2015.
This digital era seemed at first a death sentence for the darkroom based photography. Films were discontinued and photographic material companies were forced to shut down as the demand declined. In Finland most of the camera shops sold their equipment and darkrooms were dismantled. This took less than ten years.
Fortunately for the darkroom arts all the waves in the art history will face a counter wave. Analogical work started fascinating people anew when the world changed more virtual by each passing day. All of a sudden tactile and material were luxurious and rare concepts. Well known Finnish writer-esseist Antti Nylén wrote in his book Johdatus filmiaikaan – kirjoituksia valokuvaamisesta (Siltala, 2017) (Introduction of the Film Era) that actually digitalisation meant that the film based photography was finally free from the demands of commercialism. When digital photography adapted everything else from product shots to news and adds, it left the film photography with art. Finally and indisputable.
At this moment we are in the situation in Finland when darkroom photography is marginalised but it’s valued on the field of art maybe more than ever before. It has broken the bonds with its past and truly become an art form on its own cause using unique artistic possibilities and processes.
The knowledge on the darkroom photography processes has been and still is poorly known for most of the public. However those who know how darkroom photographs are made, without exception appreciate them. It’s understood that the mastery of the darkroom arts asks for knowledge which is not required when using phone cameras. People tend to appreciate deep knowledge, craft and skill, whatever the field.
Achieving a skill is however a process which requires continuous training. If you take a pause of ten years in violin playing, it takes time to climb back on the same level you once were. This applies also to the craft of darkroom arts.
Before the digital era the art of gelatin silver print was the most common of the photographic techniques. In digital era it has become increasingly rare and was in danger of disappearing from Finland completely in the professional level. Fortunately some artist masters continued working in the field and were able to forward the tactile knowledge of their craft. Still the decline of the darkroom arts is very much a fact. For instance in the Aalto University, Department of Media, School of Photography which is the most important institution in Finland offering MA level education in practice based photographic arts, there exists only one darkroom course per year. It lasts 5 days (including both film developing and gelatin silver printing) and I teach it. Is five days enough? No way. It gives the basic knowledge, but it would take a whole lot more to teach the students the advanced techniques and most of all – the seeing.
For me gelatin silver photography has been the essence of my artistic work for more than 20 years now. I’ve noticed my craft developing by the years, little by little, by the continuous training and printing. Gelatin silver printing, as all the darkroom printing methods are, is a special field of which the skill and knowledge can’t be achieved in a week, mont or year. They come by the years passing, by each print, by each repetition, by hard work – like with all the crafts.
Gelatin silver print is rarely big, fancy looking or colorful. It cannot compete with large digital prints, covering the walls in exhibits. Happily it doesn’t have to. In the continuous digital image flood it represents a timid bystander which starts to speak when you step closer and start listening.
As a concrete link to the history of photographic invention each gelatin silver print carries along the legacy of its alchemistic magic. Tactile, material photograph stays and preserves in the world where the most of the images disappear in the abyss of digital nets. Gelatin silver print is always the result of a long process and skill, with which the artist has been present on every step of the way.
in my opinion, the value of the gelatin silver print is based on three facts: the long and still present history of the art, the craft and skill of its makers and the unique creative possibilities it offers to the artists – impossible to achieve in any other technique. On the personal level I recognise of course also the joy, stemming from the craft itself, which makes it personally for me irreplaceable.
I truly hope that the appreciation of gelatin silver photography and other darkroom arts will in time rise even more and reach the level they would indeed deserve!