Digital BW, The Print

Wednesday, September 11, 2002, 12:13:02 PM, Albert Wang wrote:

AW> I found a Shutterbug article with ralph gibson and he mentions Jon Cone's 
AW> piezography. His comments I quote as follows: "Chris/Larry: Have you tried 
AW> printing with the quad tone inks, like the ones from MIS 
AW> (www.InkSupply.com).

AW> Ralph: I have. And I\ufffdve gone to InkjetMall.com (Cone Editions). I\ufffdm pretty 
AW> much abreast of what\ufffds going on. And I have used those inks, and they\ufffdre 
AW> great. It\ufffds just that they\ufffdre not better or worse than photographs. They 
AW> coexist. They\ufffdre not photographs. They\ufffdre another kind of very beautiful 
AW> print."

AW> I find it interesting that a renown artist firmly believes that the results 
AW> of piezography/inkjet printing cannot be photographs but prints. I would 
AW> tend to disagree to be honest. Photographs not in the traditional sense but 
AW> a pictoral representation using a camera should be considered a print I 
AW> would think...?

AW> Any comments about Gibson's take on this?

AW> sincerely, Alfie


Sounds to me like he is implying that to be a "print" to him means to
PRINT on silver-based traditional paper. I guess to him then
digital inkjet output of any sort are not prints.   A little narrow in his
viewpoint but he's entitled to it no matter how archaic others may
think it is.

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...