Weston at AIC

A quick addition to the previous post. These images were printed by Brett and Cole and unamed assistants under Weston's supervision circa 1952-1953. So I am assuming that the prints represent the results he would have achieved on his own, or he would not have approved them. Also please correct any factual errors, I did not aquire any exhibit literature, so anything presented as fact is from memory. Thanks for any discussion.

Brett and Cole were the only ones allowed to print from Edward's

negatives. During that period the paper was Haloid Industro developed

in Amidol. The prints were made in Edward's darkroom on Wildcat Hill

and approved by him. Although very ill at the time with Parkinsons,

his sight and mind were good and the prints are probably very much

the way he would have printed. It was from this experience, however,

that Brett decided that only he could print his own negatives, hence

the burning of them on his 80th birthday.

The book that serves as the catalogue for the exhibit is wonderful as

well.

As part of an exhibit at the MFA in Boston 2 years ago, they had a

reconstruction of westons darkroom. A L-shaped wooden bench, with a

sink in the right side. Cold running water. Trays and tongs. A gram

scale and copious hand-written notes on formula. On the dry side of

the L, the contact print frame. The light source was a bare bulb that

hung above the frame on a wire. The wire was looped back on itself

one time and held in place with a wooden clothespin. To increase the

light, lessen the loop, to decrease it, widen it. This darkroom was

indeed part of the Weston legend.

Brett actually decided that only he could print from his own negatives

when he witnessed a showing of edwards work that was printed by

several different people and even some prints that were only to be

work prints. the look, feel and quality of the prints varied enough

to, I think anyway, convince him of this point of view.

I concur that the EW show at AIC is supurb. I do differ with James

though in that I think some of the portraits, particularly the one of

Charis Wilson playing the recorder, are on a par with any of the

landscapes.

Most of the prints shown were printed by Brett and Cole under

EW's supervision in the early 1950s. The others are vintage prints by

EW himself.

Just a clarification,I hope, For What Its Worth...under the terms of

Edward Weston's will, Cole was the sole printer/point of sale for

E.W. prints after his death...with the requirement that a clear

statement be on each print to show negative by E.W. and print by

C.W. . From listening to Cole discuss it, it seems his integrity

clearly bound him to the letter of the will. Brett and Cole were

involved in the production of fine prints when E.W. was unable to do

it himself. I've never heard of anyone except Edward, Brett or Cole

printing an E.W. negative for a fine print for his signature, and

certainly not under the terms of his will. The unnamed assistants

referred to earlier may be one or more of the various folks who

studied with Edward, though I doubt they were involved in

printing...but perhaps lent a hand in later stages of print

finishing.

 

<p>

 

Things may be more murkey if you are dealing with his commercial

portrait prints. Fred.

Weston the man has intrigued me after reading the journals, California

and the West, and letters to Adams, but I'm afraid that I've always

been underwhelmed by the work having only seen the 1940ish

reproductions in C&tW. So far I've attributed his fame to his being a

flambouyant person being in the right place at the right time. I'd

love to have the privilege to see these in person and re-evaluate. Is

this show coming west anywhere?

Perhaps I am incorrect in stating that only Brett and Cole printed

from EW negatives. Cole will surely have the last word on this.

Brett, however, was adamant that his own negatives not be printed by

others. I can recall this from our initial friendship in the 50's and

reinforced through the decades. It was years later that there were

hints of a pyrotechnic conclusion. Printing his dad's 832 "Project

Prints" must surely have influenced his decision to destroy his own

negatives. Brett knew that only he could print his own work. And at

this he was a master.

I may be wrong but I am almost positive that at least one of the

title cards with a print stated something to the effect, "printed by

assistant to Edward Weston". The information about the exhibit on

the walls I beleive only mentioned Cole and Brett and that these were

part of a large group printing of several portfolios. It also stated

that it would be impossible to assemble such a group of prints done

by Edward because of limited number of prints available, or something

to that effect.

 

<p>

 

The previous issue of Black and White Magazine (August/Sept?) had a

review and I believe a schedule of the tour. I did not purchase a

copy but perhaps someone else can provide the info, or E-mail the mag

at www.bandwmag.com.

The portfolio "Six Nudes of Neil" are palladium prints made by George

Tice in 1977 from EW negatives of 1925. So,it is true that not all

prints are by EW, Cole or Brett. However, I still question printing

by assistants relative to silver gelatin exhibition prints.

Here's the exact wording re: the prints in the exhibit, copied from a

card on the north wall of the exhibit at the Art Institute:

 

<p>

 

[in addition to Brett] "Toward the end of his career, Edward Weston

also had the help of his son Cole and other assistants in printing his

work."

 

<p>

 

As far as I can recall, all of the prints in the exhibit (including

those alluded to in the quote above) are signed and dated in pencil by

EW.

 

<p>

 

<><><><

I have a copy of a book titled "Darkroom2", by Lustrum press

published in 1978, in which there is a long article by Cole Weston

about printing his father's negatives. Cole stated that he and Brett

are the only two people besides Edward who ever printed his

negatives. I don't know where the museum got the "and others". Cole

states that Edward Weston signed both his full name and E.W. to

prints made by Edward, but in later years he used his full name.

Later prints made by either Cole or Brett were initialed E.W. This is

a fascinating article on the materials used by both Edward and Cole,

as well as the darkroom setup.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

I suspect that Weston (like Adams) had darkroom assistants, but the

photographer was always present and supervised the entire printing

process. Of course, I am not refering to prints made (and so

signified on the back) by Brett and Cole without Edward present.

I'm just reading Charis Wilsons autobiography about her time with

Weston (obviously prior to this period), but as UI recall so far, the

only one who helped out was Brett - I don't think she did at the time.

 

<p>

 

Interesting book BTW

 

<p>

 

I still think one of the best EW images is her floating in the pool...

 

<p>

 

Tim A

Doug-

Thank You. I believe you have put this matter to rest. Let us accept

Cole as the final arbiter, as I suggested earlier.

There were assistants at the time Brett was printing EW negatives but

they were, as noted by Fred Leif, involved with the later stages of

print finishing. I remember Dody being very involved and Morley and

Francis Baer may also have been as they were often present when I

visited Edward during this period. The rewriting of history will

persist but perhaps with the help of living witnesses we can get it

right.

Regards,

Merg Ross

That should be Frances Baer, his wife.

In a biography of Edward Weston by Ben Maddow, there is a Selected

Chronology of Weston's life on pages 123-124 of the paperback

edition. There is an entry for 1948/1958 as follows:

 

<p>

 

"Worked on printing 1000 selected negatives. (This project was never

actually finished. The prints were made under Weston's direction,

but done by Brett, Cole, and Dody Warren.)"

 

<p>

 

Of course, the above quote does not specifically mention the exact

tasks that Dody Warren performed during the printing process

(exposure, development, fixing, mounting, etc.). In the text of the

biography, Dody Warren is described as Weston's assistant starting in

1948 when his Parkinson's disease had already begun to limit his

activities. She lived in Weston's home at Walnut Hill for almost

three years except for one eight-month absence. Weston died in 1958.

Maddow's biography of Weston was nominated in 1975 for the National

Book Award.

The Maddow book, according to Brett and Cole, was full of

inaccuracies. Dody lived in "Bodie House", a detached cottage in the

front yard.

The Maddow biography of EW simply says that Dody lived at "Walnut

Hill" for the period mentioned. So the assumption that it

was "Weston's" house (as opposed to the cottage) is my mistake. Given

that she lived on the property and was EW's assistant, it is

reasonable to assume that she did some photographic work. I believe

that Merg implied as much in his earlier post.

Michael-

You are correct--house or cottage,it really doesn't matter. Sorry to

be so petty. I have strayed a long way from James' initial query.

Merg

I'm curious about the reference to Walnut Hill? Shouldn't that be

Wildcat Hill? Fred

Yes, it is Wildcat Hill, not Walnut Hill.

Actually, Edward briefly lived at Walnut Hill when he was dabbling in

long range black powder single shot rifle marksmanship

I agree with Al that the portrait of Charis with recorder was

beautiful. It was printed by EW, too. It had a warmer tone than

most and seemed to glow with affection