Digital BW, The Print

Hi Steadman,

Yes, he felt color would not last and refused to offer it.

Let me mention one more thing about prints going bad.

About five to seven years ago I decided to close my darkroom and contract
out what little B&W  I was doing to my color/B&W lab for printing and
finishing.  This decision was made because I was not doing as much
commercial work as in the past and B&W portraits were becoming popular
again. Most of the portraits I offer are traditionally retouched on the
negative and then what can't be completed there is positively done on the
print. It was not practical for me to continue having the lab retouch the
neg, return it to me for printing and then send it back to them for positive
retouching, texture, mounting and protective "SPRAY".  I know there must
have been some exceptions, but most of the B&W prints they made for me went
bad within one to two years. I have never had to replace so many prints in
all 35 plus years of business. Not only was it embarrassing, it certainly
had some financial ramifications. Every municipal judge that I photographed
over the past 5 to seven years had to be replaced. I do not know why they
kept using me when I had to reprint everything at least twice. This business
was started in 1945, we have B&W portraits and candid wedding prints that
have been out there for a long, long time.  What caused this problem? You
will not like the answer, NO ONE KNOWS!  Everyone blamed each other, Kodak
said it was the labs fault, the lab said it was the spray, etc. What were we
doing differently now that we had not done in the past, extensive retouching
and then SPRAYING it!  My guess was the spray caused the problem, I am now
paying for expensive laminates to hide the retouching, which alters the true
look of B&W.  The best answer I came up with before that was to have the
retouching done digitally and then create a new neg that you did not need to
spray to hide the retouching. Then the lab stopped offering that service
because of the unreliable equipment.

I am now in the process of having a 16 x 20 color portrait of a child
restored. I would guess it is about 10 years old.
I gave an estimate of approximately $500.  That is probably more than she
paid for the original, but I doubt if  I will make much money on it. The
original studio that produced the portrait is no longer in business. They
were a fine studio that had been in business for over 50 years.

Now a philosophical question, if all the work you did 10 years went bad due
to no fault of your own, should you replace it for free or at least at
material cost? The above example is going to cost a lot because I did not
have the original neg. and we are having to do it digitally. As we all know
computer time is expensive.

Want another can of worms, how long should you store negs or data disks to
replace prints???? I can guarantee you this, you do not store negs to make
money on reprints at a much later date.

Regards,

John In Okc

snip
: John,
: Thanks for posting.
:
: But I missed your point about the guy with high standards and why his
client (wealthy) left him.  Is it because they wanted color and he did not
provide color?
:
: Steadman
:   ----- Original Message -----
:   <snip>:   There was a photographer in this city, who with his wife
produced some of
:   the best B & W and oil tinted B & W prints that I have ever seen. He
felt
:   that he was doing his clients a disservice to offer a medium that was
not up
:   to his standards. His clients were the more wealthy in this town, they
:   deserted him and he went BROKE!
<big snip>