Digital BW, The Print

Ah Yes, New York City. Land of the Museums. I imagine they started
calling them silver gelatin 20 years before it got to North Dakota.
We're usually about 10 years behind the rest of the country for a lot of
things up here.

Jerry



SKID Photography wrote:
> 
> Jerry, Todd, everyone,
> 
> I guess my point is that we don't get to set the labels, the academics do, those
> people are the ones that archive, and write the history.  The reasoning is that
> they have no prejudices (like 'this name sounds cool") and just want to be
> exacting and informative.
> 
> A simple example is Man Ray.  He called those cameraless images that he made
> 'Rayograms' (or something like that) and the historians label them in museums as
> 'Photograms'.
> 
> Why fight what apparently has been set in place already? (Brooklyn Museum etc.)
> 
> Again, call your prints what you will, it is certainly your right as the
> creator.  But if one wants to be 'neutral' (without any hype, marketing, or
> artistic flourish), what we all make here are 'INKJET PRINTS' using various
> different inks on various substrates..
> 
> Harvey Ferdschneider
> partner, SKID Photography, NYC
> 
> >  I recognize the difference Harvey.
> >
> > But the term "Inkjet print" does have an inferior connotation to most
> > ears. Sort of like 90 minute photo versus Custom photography.
> >
> > And it doesn't sound nearly as pretentious as "Gicl\ufffde".
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > SKID Photography wrote:
> > >
> > > Jerry,
> > > I beg to differ.
> > >
> > > To be academically correct (like from a museum and informative standpoint)
> > they
> > > are inkjet prints using 'carbon pigment' (or whatever) inks.
> > >
> > > To use any other term is a marketing ploy.  And that's ok if you recognize
> > the
> > > difference. :-)
> > >
> > > Harvey Ferdschneider
> > > partner, SKID Photography, NYC
> > >
> > > Jerry Olson wrote:
> > >
> > > >  Why not just call them what they are? Carbon Pigment Prints.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > antonisphoto wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Daniel,
> > > > >
> > > > > must've  felt nice to discover you couldn't tell a digital
> > black-and-white
> > > > from a
> > > > > darkroom print. I had the same experience several times, and at least
> > once
> > > > in
> > > > > the Museum of Photographic Arts in San Diego where a few piezoBW prints
> > > > > were thrown in with wet prints.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, we are still in the era of seeking legitimacy for our prints in
> > the
> > > > world
> > > > > of collectors, museums and galleries. Inkjet prints - especially if you
> > call
> > > > them
> > > > > that and don't use French names for them - don't have the cache of
> > "toned
> > > > > silver prints". Yet.
> > > > >
> > > > > Antonis
> > > > >
> > >
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/