在《B &W》上翻译了一篇摄影文章，废死劲了，看来还要继续努力学英文

When old and new collide

In the 19^th century, tintypes were considered to be “low class” because they were made by itinerant tintypists who were not necessarily photographers, and they were cheap. Today, contemporary tintypes and other collodion-based imagery, along with once-obscure processes such as the daguerreotype, are regularly found in the contemporary art market.

This resurgence of “alternative” processes started in the late 1970s with the rise of photography programs in colleges and universities. Self-coated printing-out-papers came into use as a creative and experimental alternative to commercially available photo products. The current rise in digital imaging triggered the decline of mass produced silver-based, latent image photographic film and paper, giving alternative processes yet another boost.

The problem for the artist, the collector, and the appraiser is the seductive aspect of how the processes look-very often an image will look better than it actually is because it is a tintype or a daguerreotype or a platinum print. We have no problem judging the qualities of vintage 19^th century material because the parameters of what make a 19^th century tintype or daguerreotype collectible are already established: condition and subject matter. The majority of 19^th century daguerreotypes and tintypes are portraits, but it is the atypical portraits such as those of criminals, corpses and odd-looking people that have value. The mundane pieces are easy to spot because there are so many of them and they all look alike.

The opposite is true when it comes to contemporary alternative processes where the process itself is so fascinating. It is sometimes difficult to separate mundane images from good images for the reason that we are not yet accustomed to seeing these processes used and they are compelling when well-executed. It falls to the collector to decide whether the tintypist is an artist or a techie. At this point in time, it seems the majority of tintypists and daguerreotypists are techies, and they will be the first to admit that they are fascinated by the process and spend most of their time perfecting their technique, and that the image is secondary to the process.

Wet-collodion reverse images (traditionally called tintypes and ambrotypes) are easier to make than daguerreotypes and consequently more accessible. There is an annual tintypist convention held in upstade New York every year by john coffer, the man who by general consensus, is responsible for the renaissance of the tintype. Coffer is anachronistic. He is enamored with the process and with the 19^th century. He is not interested in making 20^th century images, and many people who attend his workshops produce tintypes that look like they were taken in the 19^th century, and he field is rife with people using the process merely to make new tintypes look like old tintypes., use original cases and have their models dress in period costume--- not necessarily to pass them off as “fakes”, but just for the interest in recreating a tintype as close to what a 19^th century one would look like. These enthusiasts are simply attempting to re-capture the romance of the past. Unfortunately, some of these tintypes have found their way into the market place as real vintage material. However, 19^th century experts can readily recognize new/old alternative process images. These are more likely to be found on eBay than anywhere else. Ergo caveat emptor!

Contemporary tintypes (on black metal) and ambrotypes (often made on black glass) contrast modern imagery with the antiquarian process. In the current art market, people such as Nathanial W. Gibbons, Michael Mazzeo, Jayne Hinds Bidaut and Ken Merfeld have been photographers for many years and the process, although integral to the final object. The image reproduced above, No prop, No Rudder，by Nathanial W. Gibbons, sells for $3,200. It is unique as are all tintypes and daguerreotypes. Gibbons is both a classical and regional photographer, an aspect that is note unusual as the wet collodion process requires one to carry the processing equipment into the field. It is also large:14×11 inches-the size of the camera. The image is clear yet obscure at the same time.

Because the daguerreotype is much more fickle and dangerous to work with, there are fewer artists making daguerreotypes. Jerry Spagnoli is no doubt the most well-known. Although his visibility partially stems from being Chuck Closeˊs daguerreotypist, Spagnoli has been making daguerreotypes for many years,. This makes an interesting comparison. A Chuck Close daguerreotype sells for about $30,000. An original Spagnoli sells for about $4,500.

In the 21^st century, the only altenative process image that will hold there value over the long term are those made by artists using the medium who consistently produce bodies of work and are willing to cull weak images. The trick for the process, which is often easier said than done.

About the Daguerreotype:

Louis-Jacques-Mandé Daguerre invented the daguerreotype process in France. The invention was announced to the public on August 19, 1839 at a meeting of the French Academy of Sciences in Paris. American photographers quickly capitalized on this new invention, which was capable of capturing a "truthful likeness." Daguerreotypists in major cities invited celebrities and political figures to their studios in the hopes of obtaining a likeness for display in their windows and reception areas. They encouraged the public to visit their galleries, which were like museums, in the hope that they would desire to be photographed as well. By 1850, there were over 70 daguerreotype studios in New York City alone.

Popularity of the daguerreotype declined in the late 1850s when the ambrotype, a faster and less expensive photographic process, became available. A few contemporary photographers have revived the process.

About Ambrotype

The ambrotype (1851-1890s) is a thin negative image on glass made to appear as a positive by showing it against a black background. The reverse of the glass plate was either painted black or backed with a black material. The ambrotype was an inexpensive alternative to the daguerreotype, similar in size and also mainly used for portraits. Just like daguerreotypes they were kept in wooden or leather cases and were unique images. But ambrotypes were not so expensive and easier to produce, although their exposure time was much longer. It was not uncommon for an ambrotype to be coloured, if not coloured they have a grayish white appearance.

About tintypes

A tintype is a photograph made on a sheet of iron instead of a piece of paper. In 1856 Hamilton Smith patented the process for producing tintypes. Tintypes were popular from1856 until the early 1900's. Tintypes were also called ferrotypes and melainotypes. Many tintypes were put in cases making it more difficult to differentiate them from a daguerreotype. Many tintypes were placed in a paper or cardboard frame while others were used in jewelry or in photo albums. The photographer would frequently clip the corners to make the insertion in the paper or cardboard frame easier. You may find very small tintypes (about postage stamp size) in a photograph album. These were called Gem tintypes. Some schools had photographic albums for their graduating classes and they used the Gem sized tintypes for insertion in the albums. Tintypes were produced in the millions in the United States and are very commonly found today. Just like daguerreotypes, some of the tintypes were cased. Being cased makes it more difficult to distinguish the tintype from a daguerreotype.

After processing, most tintypes were varnished to protect the surface from abrasions and atmospheric conditions. Today you will find that many tintypes that were varnished are experiencing a cracking in the varnish coating. From the time it was introduced to the early 1900's tintypes were the preferred photographic process used by itinerant and street photographers. Tintypes were made mostly for portrait photography because of their relatively low cost and rapid development times. However, the image quality was not quite as good as other photographic methods.

俺的译文，觉得不好，有谁能改改？

当新与旧相互碰撞

在 19 世纪，铁版照相法被认为是“低级的”，摄影师无法反复的通过这种铁版来制作照片，并且它们很廉价，在当代，除了一次性暗房冲洗的达盖尔银版摄影术以外，铁版摄影法和火棉胶湿版摄影法经常的出现在现代艺术市场中。

这种“实验摄影”的复兴开始与1970年在大学增设的摄影课程中。自带感光涂料的相纸被发明出来并且得到应用，实验性的替代品也可以在照材市场上买得到。当前数字成像所引起的银盐成像生产大幅下降，潜影性质的摄影胶片和相纸对于实验摄影在另一方面起到了推动作用。

摄影家面临的问题是，收藏家，鉴赏家所注意的方向是如何让实验摄影看起来要比铁版或者银盐成像的照片更好，我们不用去评价作为19世纪典型的成像技术的质量，在19世纪使用铁版或者达盖尔银版摄影术已经完全成熟，不过它是有其局限性的：由当时情况条件所决定。大多数铁版或者达盖尔银版摄影术在19世纪用于肖像摄影，但那并不是典型的肖像摄影，其价值是用在拍摄罪犯、死尸、和奇怪模样的人。照片中有低俗内容的部分很容易被发现因为有很多这样的照片并且都很相似。

湿版火棉胶的负像（通常习惯于称之为铁版摄影法或玻璃版摄影术）要比达盖尔银版摄影法要容易制作，因此更能被大家接受。每年都有铁版摄影的年度大会在纽约的john coffer召开。人们一致认为应当承担起把这项技术复兴起来的责任。john coffer存在于一个错误的时代，他迷恋于19世纪时期的这项影像冲洗技术，而对于20世纪的影像不感兴趣。很多人去参观了coffer的工作间，他的车间制作铁版摄影，看上去就好像走进了19世纪。他的取材广泛，但是人们使用这种工艺只不过把新的铁版仿造成旧的那样。虽然使用的是那种传统的曾经流行的方式，但是如果要把兴趣放在重现接近19世纪的铁版摄影上面，是没有必要的。这些热衷者的想法很简单，就是重新去感受一下那种曾经的浪漫。不幸的是，一些用这种仿制的当时制作出来的锡板版摄影作品出现在了艺术市场中，就好像是真的老铁版摄影一样。不过19世纪的专家们可以很容易的鉴别出这些新与旧的摄影作品。这些仿制品在ebay上出现的比任何地方都要多。因此购买者应当细心注意！

研究古老摄影术的会把当代的铁版摄影（在黑色金属上）和玻璃版摄影（在黑色玻璃上）和当代的人像摄影作比较。在当前的市场中，诸如Nathanial W. Gibbons, Michael Mazzeo, Jayne Hinds Bidaut and Ken Merfeld这些有着丰富技术经验的摄影师们，构成了这个领域的主体人物，《没有支柱，没有船舵》，由Nathanial W. Gibbons所拍摄的照片，该作品买到3200美元。这在铁版或者达盖尔银版摄影术中是不寻常的。Gibbons是专业的古典摄影师，一方面关注的领域是可以达到湿版火棉胶摄影法需求的设备，同时也对:14×11英尺的相机很感兴趣。这样产生的照片既清晰又柔和。

因为达盖尔银版摄影法在制作过程中非常不稳定并且伴随这一定的危险，所以很少有艺术家去使用。Jerry Spagnoli无疑是非常著名的，尽管他的知名度尚不及Chuck Close（著名肖像摄影师），Spagnoli研究达盖尔银版摄影已经很多年了。这就形成了一个很有意思的比较，一件Chuck Close的摄影作品可以卖到30000美元，而Spagnoli的作品原件可以卖到4500美元。

在21世纪，实验摄影要想长期的保持自身的价值，必须通过整个艺术家团体一致的协作，去主动的消除那些不好的照片。毕竟耍花招要比做实事容易得多。

关于达盖尔银版摄影法（Daguerreotype）：

路易·雅克·芒戴·达盖尔在法国发明了“达盖尔摄影法”，1839年8月19日，在巴黎法国科学院召开的一个会议上，他向社会公布了这项发明。美国摄影师迅速的利用里这种新发明，这种发明可以捕捉到“真实的形象”。达盖尔邀请了很多城市的主要名人和政治人物，请他们到自己有着展示窗口和接待区的工作室来参观，并且鼓励市民也来参观。工作室就好像一个博物馆，同样也可以满足参观者拍照的愿望。到了1850年，仅纽约就有超过70家这样的工作室。

19世纪50年代后期，这种摄影法的受欢迎程度逐渐下降，因为玻璃版摄影法出现了，新的摄影法更快捷，廉价，只需要很少的经验就能操作。只有很少数的当代摄影师在重现这种冲洗工艺。

关于玻璃版摄影法（Ambrotype）

玻璃版摄影法（1851-1890）是一种在玻璃上呈现出的很薄的负像（类似于现在以胶片为基底的负片，译者注），在玻璃后面有黑色的背景。黑色背景或者是涂黑的或者用黑色的材料衬托。这种摄影法是作为廉价的替代品出现的，它取代了达盖尔银版摄影法。照片的尺寸大小基本一样并且多用在肖像摄影上。和达盖尔相同的是要放置在木质或者皮革的相框内，这种照片很独特。不过玻璃版要比达盖尔便宜的多而且很容易制作，尽管需要很长的曝光时间。有很多这种照片是上过颜色的，如果没有上颜色，外观看上去是灰白色的。

关于铁板摄影法（tintypes）

铁板摄影法是在铁板上成像而不是纸张，1856年汉密尔顿史密斯取得了这种工艺的专利。从1856年开始流行一直到1900年初。铁板摄影法也被称作光面照片（ferrotypes）或黑景摄影法(melainotype)。许多铁板摄影照片在很多情况下很难与达盖尔摄影照片区分出来。他们多数是被放在纸或者纸板框中另外也有放在首饰（胸针或者项链）和相框中，摄影师经常修剪照片的边角这样可以更容易插入到纸或者纸板框中。你可以在相册中找到那种很小尺寸的铁板照片（大小和邮票差不多），被称作“Gem tintypes”，一些学校的影集中就有为他们的毕业班所制作的这种尺寸的照片，在美国铁版摄影照片有数百万张，即便现在也很容易发现它们。就像达盖尔银版照片一样多，一些铁板照片被装框，很难与达盖尔印版照片相区分。

铁板照片在冲洗之后，通常会涂上光漆用来保护表面，不让照片被划伤或被空气腐蚀。现在你能看到一些曾经上了光漆的老照片，在经历了年月之后表面已经磨损划伤了。从时间上看，早在1900年，那些游走在街头的摄影家们就首选的采用了这种技术，铁版摄影被大量的应用在肖像摄影中，因为它是相对廉价的，所以发展很迅速。然而，相对于其他的摄影技术来说，照片质量并不是很好的。