A Return to Tintypes

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct91% picked this

   highlight the circumstances that make the renewed interest in early photographic

   Why this is right

   Wow, it actually used the word "ironic"! I promise, I didn't peek. We can justify the idea that this phrase conveys irony (irony = the opposite of what's expected) because one would expect that on the verge of a digital revolution, photography would move forward by embracing and experimenting with these NEW digital photographic techniques. Instead, there's this groundswell of interest in janky old technology. Huh. That's not what we'd expect. Hence, it's ironic.

   Skill tested: Local Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   91%
2. B

   Too Strong2% picked this

   indicate that most photographers are wary of advanced

   Too Strong: most Out of Scope: advanced We can't really quantity what proportion of photographers are into this new trend of rediscovering old technology. According to this answer, it's more than 50% of them. We also don't have support for the idea that they're wary of advanced techniques. (Is a filmless digital camera an advanced technique?) If anything this seems opposite. Using a digital camera is the easiest that photography has ever been. A lot of them have auto focus and auto exposure and such. The old techniques that many photographers are rediscovering are super complicated and involved. We might not call them "advanced", but it would be hard to say that the photographers who are brave enough to try resurrecting these absurd procedures are intimidated by a complicated technique. Finally, when we think about how this choice answers the question, does the phrase "on the verge of a filmless, digital revolution" indicate anything about most photographers' willingness to use advanced photo techniques?

   2%
3. C

   Out of Scope: skeptical view2% picked this

   reveal the author's skeptical views regarding the trend toward the use of

   The author seems pretty enchanted with this movement. He understands the appeal of these old techniques to the people rediscovering them. He does tell us, his audience, about why these techniques became obsolete, but his final takeaway is, "old methods offer the possibility of recovering an intimacy with photographic communication that mass media have all but overwhelmed" So overall, the author seems sympathetic to this trend.

   2%
4. D

   Too Strong3% picked this

   suggest that most photographers who are artists see little merit in the

   Too Strong: most Out of Scope: see little merit We can't really quantity what proportion of photographers are into the new digital technology. According to this answer, it's less than 50% of them. This answer is saying that more than 50% of photographic artists "see little merit in the new digital technology". That's just too strong, given that we have no sentence anywhere suggesting that a majority of modern photographers have such a negative view about the new technology. We know that there is this trend of rediscovering old stuff, but a photographer could easily nerd out on tintypes while still acknowledging that there's some merit in the new technology.

   3%
5. E

   Too Strong: probably a fad2% picked this

   imply that the groundswell of interest by photographers in old processes will probably turn out to

   The author may believe this, since he does point out that all these techniques became obsolete and because digital photography is the growing revolution. But we don't have any textual support for the pessimism that the "antiquarian avant-gardists" who comprise this groundswell of interest will probably lose interest once this fad passes. The groundswell of interest consists of photographers who specifically are attracted to the weird, idiosyncratic results of these old techniques, as well as the hands-on intimacy of creating the photos. Do we have any reason to think that artists whose aesthetic involves uncertainty, novelty, mystery, illusion will give up on those aesthetic impulses?

   2%