Digital BW, The Print

Clayton,
   
  Thanks for the repsonse. I do agree with you on the points you have made.
   
  T
Clayton Jones <cj@...> wrote:
          Hello T,

>...and I found two inkjet prints that showed micro-banding and one 
>that had posterization in the shadow area. IMHO these prints 
>were fatally flawed and should not have been on exhibit, they 
>detracted from the other high quality prints on display.

>That gets me thinking. Is it content or whether a photo has flaws? 
>What are we really looking for..?

This is a good point but I also can see Julian's point. Like it or
not, inkjet prints are still fighting for acceptance in the minds of
many. This is a major exhibition in a major venue and will be viewed
by many people (and possibly will be reviewed by art critics). It
also provides an opportunity to compare silver and ink side by side. 
If there ever was an occasion where it is imperative that all the
prints really should be of the highest quality, this would surely
qualify (of course, for many photographers, highest quality only is
always the rule, no matter what the venue).

It's probably safe to say the flaws will go unnnoticed by most
viewers. But it would be a shame if someone who is biased against
ink prints were to examine them carefully and find there the excuse to
support his bias. And, even worse, if that person were a reviewer who
would publish his/her opinion.

Regards,
Clayton

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



         

 		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail.

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