Q11

[Gelato]

Is B too narrow in scope for the purpose?

[Djjustin818]

I'd also like an answer for the same question. I was between B and C but chose B.

[matthew.mainen]

First off with B, I'm not sure we are really given details on how these old photographic methods are used, we're only told what methods are used (tintypes, eggwhite coating etc.. Etc..). In other words, we have the "what" rather then than "how."

Think of the difference between my telling you that I like to paint and HOW I like to paint (first I carefully select my subject, then I mix my colors, then I adjust the lighting etc...).

Were B correct, then we should see a whole lot of "how" in the passage. We don't.

The main point of this piece is found at the beginning of the third paragraph: when it comes to film, we're moving forward into the past. The two preceding as well as proceeding paragraphs flesh this main point out.

[cyt5015]

Can someone help me to eliminate answer A? Thanks!

[maryadkins]

First off with B, I'm not sure we are really given details on how these old photographic methods are used, we're only told what methods are used (tintypes, eggwhite coating etc.. Etc..). In other words, we have the "what" rather then than "how."

I like this explanation. I think you're right.

It's also correct to say, as someone did above, that (B) is too narrow; the passage discusses an entire phenomenon in the field of photography, and indeed the beginning of paragraph 3 is a great synthesis of the main point: photography is moving forward into the past. (C) gets at this same idea.

(A) is too extreme. The author is not "making a case" for the value of old processes; he or she is describing how photographers are using them to suit their preferences.

(D) is unsupported; the passage isn't about acclaim.

(E) is likewise unsupported. We are given details about Estabrook's use of old processes, and Jayne Hinds Bidaut's, but the point of the passage is not to contrast them.

[Reijovem.36]

With a weak author's opinion in this passage... How do you refrain from eliminating choice C that contains such language as "surprising"!?

This would seem to require an additional logical leap. That is either illicit or non-existent in the passage.

Thanks

[ottoman]

I was not sure about the word 'surprising' in the answer choice.

Was I too picky?

[ohthatpatrick]

I see the reservation with "surprising", for sure, although this is where you go back to the passage to see if you can make peace with it (since this answer is otherwise the best at capturing the big picture).

An important mantra on modern RC (test 60 and beyond) is "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good".

To rephrase that old cliche:
Don't expect that the correct answer is 100% provable. There are a handful of correct answers in every RC section these days that would have been "too big a leap" on old school RC. But they are still the BEST of the available choices.

Don't get me wrong, most RC answers are still very provable from available text, but on modern tests I find that I sometimes have to plug my nose and pick the best of the available options rather than having that same verifiable confidence I used to with every answer choice on older tests.

As a previous poster mentioned, "surprising" is implicit, not explicit.

- photography is moving forward ... into its past?!

- The old techniques are hands-on/idiosyncratic. That's the source of their appeal ... also the prime reason for their eclipse!!

- Stains and imperfections from gum bichromate / albumen would have been cropped by a 19th century ... but Estabrook retains them?!!!

I'm obviously adding my own emphasis, but it's pretty fair to call something surprising/ironic/anomalous if it deviates from the norm or goes against common practice / common sense.

Hope this helps.

[clementm284]

I thought you shouldn't need to think beyond anything the text for correct answers? I don't see anything it being surprising in any sense considering that the entire text is endorsing old photography and their techniques.

That should make C out of scope. Nobody cares whether the recent development of photographic arts surprising or not. I ended up picking B in my practice run for this reason.

[ohthatpatrick]

Well, I already provided three textual examples of surprise, but there are more ...

These older techniques were replaced by others that were "simpler, cheaper, faster, and more consistent in their results". (lines 29-32)

It's surprising that "more complex, more expensive, slower, and more haphazard" techniques would be coming into fashion.

It's surprising that "today's artists ... court the very uncertainty that early innovators sought to banish".

It's surprising that "the stains and imperfections of prints made from gum bichromate" that "probably would have been cropped out by a 19th century photographer" are being purposefully retained by Estabrook.

A reason to not like (B) is that it makes the passage mainly about the process, when in reality it's more about the people, the artists.

P1 is about Bidaut.
P2 is about Estabrook.
P3 concludes with "so diverse are THE ARTISTS returning to photography's roots ... THE MOVEMENT seems like a groundswell".
P4 explain the appeal of the techniques to the artists.
P5 searches out the deeper motivations of the artists.

The details we get about the processes are incidental and secondary. The main point of the passage is about artists who want to back in touch with hands-on approaches and random / unique / nonstandardized results.