Digital BW, The Print

I second that perspective. I hosted Henry sometime back at a symposium on Digital vs. Film at the
School of Visual Arts in NYC. His reputation preceded him and our experience w/ his visit only
confirmed his integrity. He is very personable, easy to talk to, infact, almost humble. BTW, he
did mention the lawsuit against Kodak about the Fading prints which turned out favorably for
photographers. 

Curious about the double standard. A classmate of mine in '93 created an image for a NY Times
article on John Grisham. They rejected the print from a Kodak XL7700 Dye-Sub printer because they
could "see the dots" under high magnification. In-house pubs had used this type of output media
w/out issue. A decision, it was felt, made out of ignorance. My classmate has gone on to great
things.  -Barry

--- claudej1@... wrote:

> Back in 1993, I paid full price for Wilhem's book and read most of it. I was 
> shocked when I read, in chapter 8, about how many portrait photographers lost 
> their business over faded prints from Kodak. Wilhelm was a "starving 
> scientist" then and really believed in what he was doing. The only difference now is 
> people give a damn BECAUSE of inkjet while no photographer I knew (of hundreds) 
> back then wanted to switch to the superior Fuji paper because Kodak had a 
> monopoly on American Portrait labs.
> 
> Wilhelm told the truth and Kodak couldn't stop him. The only difference now, 
> is he's got money and credibility by way of the internet, but he has paid his 
> dues for sure.
> 
> Inkjet, being new, has created a double standard, like most things digital. 
> It's easy to pixel peep a file and put a loupe to an inkjet print. No one ever 
> did that to a darkroom print or bought a microscope to examine film grain.
> 
> Trust Wilhelm, he's one of the good guys.
> 
> Claude
> 
> In a message dated 10/12/2005 7:52:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com writes:
> As far as I know, he has never produced a test for a client that they 
> didn't like. That's not to say that Kodak has no self interest 
> either, but they have a very long history of great research and 
> integrity.
> 
> FWIW,
> 
> Tom O'Connell
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
>