Digital BW, The Print

Guy, I should emphasize that this has been seat-of-pants over the past
several months...not big science, maybe not even true this week :-)

Two of the galleries were owned by the photographers who were
showing...both genuinely exceptionally fine, one working both
traditionally and digitally in B&W, mostly printing 16X20-up (I've not
talked with this guy...need to...don't know his views, but they'll be
important)...the other a woman who photographs old vehicles, shows
huge and spectacular Epson prints (done by a small lab). She's also a
painter and her photos show that background. 

None of the digital prints were glossy or semi-gloss...just the work
of photographers intent on strong images (maybe half use digital labs,
the same way many/most traditional gallery-exhibiting photographers
use labs for dye transfer or big Ektacolor/Ciba prints). 

All of the digital prints were at least 20X24...which obviously 
figures:  galleries inherently WANT to sell big prints, why would they
bother displaying little hobbiest-budgeted prints? 

The majority of silver prints around town are small (under 16X20),
typically antiquities by the usual famous suspects...the *vast*
majority of modern images are color, whether digital or wet, and BIG,
often 30X40-ish and above.

Djon



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, guy washburn
<guido02474@y...> wrote:
> Djon,
> 
> Great report! This matches well what I am hearing from
> gallery owners (who could care less about technology
> and only want what is perceived to have lasting value
> and will sell).
> 
> Any consensus on what papers are working for them?
> Matte or Gloss/SemiGloss/Luster?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Guy
> --- Djon <westsidemaurice@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > I've been looking closely at fine digital prints on
> > display in
> > expensive Santa Fe NM galleries, talking to the
> > photographers. 
> > 
> > Amazing stuff. Santa Fe is full of worthless
> > painting and jewelry
> > schlock, but several photo galleries are the best
> > I've seen anywhere.
> > 
> > I always ask: The printer is invariably an Epson
> > (2200, 4000, 9600)
> > and the pigments are invariably OEM, both B&W and
> > color. 
> > 
> > They look faaaabulous. They lack nothing Vs silver
> > prints, and are
> > lots better than 90% of the "fine" Ciba...though
> > some giant Ektacolor
> > prints have been startling...
> > 
> > The photographers simply did fine photographs and
> > used high quality
> > tools to produce fine prints. They evidently weren't
> > looking for
> > cheapest, newest, or "alternative" solutions. They
> > evidently weren't
> > into shopping, machines, or tinkering.