Digital BW, The Print

Tyler,
 
>The point, to me, is this- it's not about the numbers...
>not about presuppositions about technical superiority or 
>what photographs are "supposed" to look like.  
>...processes...in the right hands with the right images, 
>can make beautiful art.
>Obviously beautiful art. Not, sort of, or maybe, or
>if-you-look-at-it-right...But to the majority there by a 
>huge margin, over color, over blacker blacks, relatively
>unsophisticated eyes and critical eyes together. 

Beautiful, thank you for reporting this.  The truth of this was
brought home to me very strongly just yesterday.  Last week I made a
portrait of our church priest in his study and it turned out really
well.  I decided to make some small prints on various papers and let
him select the one he likes best for the final print.  

Some weeks ago Steve Karafyllakis gave me some Arches paper (not
their ink jet paper but regular smooth watercolor paper, it has some
sizing in it but not inkjet coating), and I'd been waiting for the
right image to try it on and this portrait seemed like a good
candidate.  So I made five 4x5 prints, cold to very warm, using
Kayenta, Fiba, PR, Smooth Cotton (Innova) and the Arches.  As
expected, the Arches print was very warm, soft, grainier (all were
Eboni BO), and much lower dmax.  But it surprised me with a wonderful
subtle, long scale glowing beauty - it looks very much like an old
platinum print.

Yesterday I took them to church, and when I laid them out he instantly
said "Oh I like that one the best" and pointed to the Arches.  He
proceeded to look at the others carefully but didn't change his mind.
This surprised me and I decided to show them to other people and ask
them to pick the one they liked best.  I showed them to 22 people,
here's the result:

     Paper        Votes     Tone
-----------------------------------------
Smooth Cotton       9     Medium Warm
Arches              7     Very Warm
Fiba                3     Medium Warm
Photo Rag           2     Medium Warm
Kayenta             1     Cold

It's interesting that the one with the best dmax, PR, was in next to
last place.  Smooth Cotton is an interesting paper because the paper
color is warmer than PR and has an over all warmer look, but the ink
color (Eboni) is actually a tiny bit cooler than on PR.  It also has a
sort of 3D effect, subtle but noticeable.  Things like books on a
shelf in the background have a "presence" that's lacking in the
others, and several people made comments about it (also FWIW, no one
made any comments about the pics looking grainy or dotty or anything
related to them being BO - they received only oohs and aahs and
compliments, and these were 4x5s getting close up examination).

What's also interesting is the way they made their choices.  Everyone
who chose the Arches made instant decisions.  The moment they saw them
they liked it way better than the others.  Everyone who chose Smooth
Cotton (and most of the others) did so after careful deliberation. 
The one person who chose the cold tone Kayenta print also made an
instant decision.  Both the Arches and the Kayenta were the most
different in tone, warmer and colder, than the other three which were
similar.  I'm not sure what this means but it's interesting so I pass
it along FWIW.

The Arches print, by technical standards shared by many photographers,
would not be considered "good", yet is has a beauty that 1/3 of the
people responded to.  I'm going to explore this paper some more and
find out what it's limitations are.  I'm sure there are some images
that won't look good at all, but some that will.  I'm eager to try
some western landscapes with it.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm