Digital BW, The Print

>
>
> You make some good points.  One of the things I'm sensitive to in a
> name is the aesthetic part of it, and Piezograph seems too mechanical
> or technical or something and carries no inherent meaning to someone
> who knows nothing about it.  Plus it's hard for a lay person to
> pronounce.  I have trouble visualizing that term in upscale gallery
> with refined clientele ("We sell only the finest Silver, Piezograph
> and Platinum prints").  Somehow it doesn't quite fit. 
>
> I finally settled on Carbon Ink Print because it's accurate, doesn't
> encroach on a previous name, is easy to pronounce and remember, and
> has an elegance and distinction that fits better with Silver and
> Platinum (plus the historical references I mentioned in the article -
> I don't know if that's important to anyone else, I'm a romantic I
> guess - but I think it helps).  I also believe we should capitalize on
> the fact that it's an ink-based process, something people don't talk
> about very much.
>
> Regards,
> Clayton
>
  This topic of what to call inkjet prints crops up from time to time 
with respect to color prints as well, and I don't think it's ever been 
resolved.  I think "Carbon Ink" is excellent for all the reasons 
mentioned- everybody knows what carbon is, and what ink is.  I think 
"Piezo" would throw non-printers off.  I wish there were an equally 
obvious name for color.  "Giclee" seems to have established itself in 
many places.  I don't think that "inkjet" should be rejected, however, 
because, after all, that's what they are. Why we need a euphemism, I 
don't know.

James Irelan


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]