Digital BW, The Print

For me, and I suppose for many people, it's not the maximum density of the
Platinum process that is appealing but rather the the range of tones. If
you'll notice that the platinum/palladium print has up to a 9.5 stop range
of subject tones, this means more subtlety. I too would not want to argue
about this, it is just a matter of which material best supports your vision.
There is a concrete value in the platinum/palladium print, just not the same
value that might be in a silver or inkjet print.

"Photography is a medium of limitations"(I don't know who to attribute that
to) so that a print that reflects graceful and intelligent control is
sometimes highly valued. Maybe, severe limitations, overcome to produce
complex and expressive artworks, produce greater value.

Wendel


> 
> I'm not a platinum printer, but I confess I've never understood the "tonal
> separation and range" reputation of platinum.  From what I've seen and read,
> their dmax is not very good.  For example, see
> http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/herbst_azo_amidol.html  where Bob Herbst
> compares platinum to Azo prints.  As I read his results, the platinum had a
> dmax of only 1.48.  This is about what one can expect of carbon pigment
> injet blacks like Eboni on Arches Hot Press, but it's very noticeably below
> the 1.7+ that Photo Rag and cheap PremierArt Premium Matte can get with even
> the C86 and Epson driver.
> 
> Materials at an exhibit of selected Getty collection Edward Weston prints I
> saw a couple of years ago seemed to indicate that Weston moved from platinum
> to silver due to the limited platinum dynamic range.
> 
> I'm wondering if the appeal of platinum, aside from nostalgia and being
> different, is from the matte look.  While many seem to think glossy is more
> "photographic," I think a matte image often gives much better access to the
> print's information due to the lack of distracting reflections.
> 
> I'm just speculating here and not trying to be argumentative about the
> qualities of platinum prints.  I honestly would like to know where
> platinum's reputation comes from.  I don't doubt that there is some
> aesthetic quality to that technology that may have been lost in the silver
> print, but I'm not sure what it is from a technical point of view.  When the
> prints are mounted behind glass in, for example, the Weston exhibit, I just
> don't see much if any visible difference between the platinum prints and the
> old silver prints, which were often warmer than the platinum.