Digital BW, The Print

Yes, and the Steiglitz gs's were just ok by today's standards, (I have
to say my personal work is better technically) nothing like the
effects he got in graveur. OTOH, the silver stuff was more likely on
constant display in at least roomlight as opposed to the other stuff
probably safely stores in volumes of Camera Work.

I agree that the matte surface & lack of reflection contribute to a
feeling of depth, but I also feel that it's really a limitation of the
today's dmax measuring technology & technique that doesn't take this
into account. ie greater darkness & depth work for me & most viewers
regardless of what the tests say.

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Paul Roark <roark.paul@...> wrote:
> Hi Lew,
> A quick follow-up.  I had not seen the B&W forum yet when I sent the first
> response.
> I took some test strips into a display of all sorts of old platinum and
> other types of prints in L.A. once.  The colors of the old prints varied a
> lot.  But, I thought some of the carbon pigment prints could match some of
> the old photos rather well.
> Actually, until the silver print came along the dmax of the old processes
> was not very good.  I think much of what people liked was the matte surface
> and lack of reflection that gave more of a feeling of depth.
> I was surprised that Ed Weston's early silver prints were actually warmer
> than the platinum he was printing.
> At any rate, I think the old processes are interesting and can have a nice
> look.  I know a chemist who loves them due to the chemistry -- which can
> include some nasty stuff.  Since my chemist brother died young from his
> exposure, I'll definitely be sticking with my carbon on cotton.
> Paul
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:10 AM, Lew Schwartz <lew1716@...> wrote:
>>
>> Is there a location in/around NYC where I can see some carbon/cotton work?
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>