Digital BW, The Print

Brooks,

Welcome to the group and thank you for the long and thoughtful post. 

While the topic of the group is all forms of B&W output from a 
digital file, inkjet printing, especially with quad ink sets, has 
dominated. Any information you are willing to share on other 
techniques would be more than welcome.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., lensworkpub@y... wrote:
> I have just discovered your group and hope you don't mind my adding 
a 
> bit to the conversation.
> Martin, thanks for the kind words about our magazine!
> Yes, we do use digital negatives in our process of making the 
> LensWork Special Editions prints. I have been very candid about 
this 
> and discussed it in length both in the magazine (LensWork #23, page 
> 11) and in an article on our website called "An Alternative to the 
> Gallery System" posted at http://www.lenswork.com/lwsarticle2.htm. 
> There I outline the use of the computer and our digital component. 
> Our method is somewhat different than Dan Burkholder's method. In 
> fact, Dan and I taught a workshop together demonstrating the 
> differences in approach and results. We may do so again! Dan's work 
> is stunning and perfectly appropriate for his platinum prints. His 
> method, however, doesn't work as well for silver prints due to the 
> higher resolution of silver paper and the inherent problems with a 
> stochastic screen. I pioneered a different technique that is, quite 
> simply, better for silver, simpler and faster. We use 425-line 
screen 
> negatives from an Agfa Avantra 44 image setter created from an 
> Acrobat file. I am happy to share more details if you are 
interested.

This is an area where many people have tried Dan' methods for silver 
and found them very lacking. If you would be so kind as to elaborate 
on how you overcame the problems with his methods there would be a 
lot of eager listeners
 

(snip)

> In fact, I would love it if digital technology became the new 
> paradigm for fine art photography because I believe in it so 
> strongly. I've taken a considerable amount of heat from some of my 
> fellow photographers because of our pricing philosophy, but I feel 
> strongly that one of the best benefits of this digital evolution 
(as 
> well as mechanical digital prints from ink-jet printers) is the 
> possibility that fine art photography can become affordable again 
to 
> everyone. I am much more interested in the changes in DISTRIBUTION 
> that will be developed from digital technologies than I am changes 
in 
> CREATIVITY, though both will be profoundly impacted by these 
> technologies.

I have long thought that one of the fundamental problems of art 
distribution is that human creativity and the ability to produce 
works of art simply out strips our ability to consume it. My opinion 
of the gallery system is.... well I find it difficult to express this 
in a civil manner.

The need to find alternate distribution channels is of paramount 
importance and your Editions have been an attempt to offer and 
alternative. How successful do you feel you have been with this? 


> As to the photogravures, our printer is Russ Dodd and he is, 
> unequivocally, the best photogravure printer in the world. I have 
> seen Strange Ross' work and it simply does not compare. I've 
> seen "the best" photogravures in the world both historically and 
from 
> contemporary photogravure printers and I am here to tell you that 
> Russ Dodd's photogravures are simply better, richer, more subtle 
and 
> refined.

Considering how much hand work is involved in pulling a photogravure 
and the life of the plate, I am amazed at your pricing. 


>And yes, he is using a variation on the digital negative 
> technique. Why? Because digital negatives are the solution to so 
many 
> of photography's technical problems. I am convinced that we will 
look 
> back on traditional enlarger-based printing techniques as a quaint, 
> but primitive methodology.

(snip)

> As ditital artists, those of 
> you on this forum had best be prepared for the coming backlash as 
the 
> first crop of digital prints begin to fade and turn blue on 
people's 
> walls. It pains me to say it, but there are some digital artists 
out 
> there who have been selling early digital prints now without full 
> disclosure to the buyers and I fear there is a time bomb of bad PR 
> headed our way.

I am afraid you are all too right on this one. I know a woman who has 
been selling digital color paintings printed with standard Epson inks 
on regular bond paper. Her prices are low and she has put a great 
deal into circulation in her area. She has been at it for a good 10 
years and I can only imagine what all this stuff looks like at this 
point.

> That is why this forum and others like it are so important. In 
short, 
> you guys on this forum are right and I just wanted to let you know 
> that I am firmly on your side!

Thanks for the support and keep up the good work!

Martin Wesley