Digital BW, The Print

Gregory Popovitch is raising some very interesting and valid points, 
particularly regarding the difficulty of mastering certain elements 
of the darkroom part of the process of creating a silverprint. If a 
process becomes so simple that anyone can do it, then it can hardly 
be sold at a price which is completely disconnected from the cost of 
production. Currently, most people think it is easy to make inkjet 
prints (which is partly true), therefore an inkjet print can't be 
sold for much money and cant offer a collector a potentially huge 
profit.

What we need is a few artist which will produce work of recognized 
beauty and lasting value. It took nearly a century for classic 
photography to earn the respect it currently enjoys.  This is largely 
attributable to the lifelong work of a few great artists and most if 
not all of the commercially successful photographers among those were 
also great darkroom masters. I do not think that digital photography 
will have to wait a century to gain recognition, but it may be longer 
than we would like.

One not so little thorny point that is not helping at the moment is 
the question of longevity of inkjet prints. When a gallery sells a 
silver print, it knows it will last longer than the remaining life of 
the gallery owner and longer than the remaining life of the buyer. So 
there is complete peace of mind on this front. The infamous blunders 
of Epson with regard to longevity of some of their inkjet prints has 
cast a very dark and lasting shadow on this type of prints regardless 
of the fact that it is dye or pigment color or black and white, with 
new improved ink or on a different paper base. More than a few 
gallery owners are scared stiff of injet prints for this simple 
reason and may remain irrationally scared for a long time because, 
quite conveniently,  in certain milieu avoiding inkjet prints has 
become the "artistically correct" attitude.

Jean-Michel Paris

>I have been reading this forum, and I have been debating whether to join
>the epson-inkjet crowd or stay with my darkroom. I have been thinking about
>why aren't inkjet prints more accepted by galleries. Here are some thoughts
>on
>the question, and I'm really looking forward to hear your reactions.
>
>I believe there are multiple reasons why inkjet prints readily accepted by
>galleries, one beeing that it is neither proven nor accepted that some
>technical wizardry is necessary to produce an great inkjet print.
>
>Some time ago, Michael Kravit wrote:
>
>"I would venture to say that it will still be a while for the
>paper coatings and inks to be able to replicate the "glow" and luminescence
>of a Michael Kenna or John Sexton print."
>
>and George J Kunze replied:
>
>"I would venture that it will still be a while before 99% of silver printers
>can replicate the glow and luminescence of a Kenna or Sexton."
>
>I think these comments are very true, and explain why inkjet prints are not
>as acceptable today for galleries (and collectors):
>
>1- the best silver printers (the ones collected and found in galleries) can
>   produce prints better than today's inkjet technology (at least for small
>prints,
>   11x14 and smaller, like Michael Kenna's).
>
>but more important:
>
>2- producing a great silver print, of the caliber that ends up in galleries,
>requires
>   a mastery that is achieved by a very small percentage of printers. Because
>these
>   great silver printers are few, great silver prints are rare and not easily
>duplicated!
>
>And it is really the print itself which is important! I've read that once
>behind glass,
>you can't tell an inkjet print from a silver print. So what? You can't tell
>either a
>lenswork special edition (or even a very well printed duotone) from the
>original silver print
>behind glass without a loupe, but nobody is surprised that these sell for
>much less
>than an original print. It is because a great silver print is a rare object,
>not easily
>duplicated.
>
>Now is this true for an inkjet print? Are there some inkjet prints that
>really shine, and
>of a quality unreachable for 99% of those who try. Is is really hard to
>print hundred's
>of them if needed? What if I use your file, your printer, same ink, curves,
>paper, RIP, etc...
>
>You guys even say it all the time. You get better prints with your Epsons
>than you ever got
>in the darkroom, and some of you have probably spent decades becoming silver
>(or platinum)
>printers and a couple years with your Epsons. Obviously, it is easier to
>make great inkjet
>prints... which makes a great inkjet print not so exciting anymore.
>
>I think Mark Tucker talked about doing something to his prints to make them
>unique.
>I do think this is the one way to get inkjets accepted (especially if this
>something is
>unique, difficult, and requires some mastery). For example Dan Burkholder
>makes platinum
>prints from digital negatives, and then adds color using an inkjet printer.
>If I was a gallery
>owner, I think I'd be somewhat impressed because this process is new,
>requires an exacting
>technique, and won't be easily duplicated by my brother in law with his
>1280.
>
>Also you have to worry about the pace of progress in digital technology:
>
>If I buy this great inkjet print, maybe in a couple years the new Epson
>70000 with its
>4000dpi, 10 ink tanks, 1000 year pigments and enhanced diffusion dither will
>allow Dan
>to make *much* better prints. Hopefully, my 2002 print will keep its value
>because it is
>vintage :-)
>
>True, silver papers and processes evolve too, but nowhere as fast as digital
>technology.
>
>Anyway, these are some thoughts. I hope I didn't offend anyone. I really
>enjoy this
>forum and the quality of its participants.
>
>Gregory Popovitch
>
>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- Include your full name with your message.
>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
>to keep them short.
>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


-- 
Jean-Michel Paris
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
ETHERGRAPHIK INC.                                          Tél : (514) 744-3312
795, rue Muir, Porte 801                   Sans Frais : 1 (888) 211-8522
Saint-Laurent, Qc  H4L 5H8                             Fax : (514) 744-5075
CANADA 
<jmparis@...>
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ - Cette communication est exclusivement 
destinée à son destinataire nominatif ; elle peut contenir des 
renseignements à usage restreint, confidentiels ou privilégiés au 
sens de la loi, dont la copie ou la communication à toute autre 
personne est interdite ou illégale. Si vous avez reçu cette 
communication par erreur, nous nous en excusons et vous prions de 
nous en aviser et d'en détruire les exemplaires papier ou 
électroniques en votre possession.  CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This 
communication is intended for the exclusive use of its addressee; it 
may contain privileged, confidential or restricted information under 
the law, whose communication to any other party is forbidden or 
illegal. If you have received this communication in error, please 
accept our apologies, notify us and delete any paper and electronic 
copies thereof.