Digital BW, The Print

I still do not like the name Inkjet print, nor Gicl\ufffde. What other
choices are there that don't sound pretentious, or cheap? :)

Jerry



SKID Photography wrote:
> 
> Jerry,
> Carbon Pigment prints could also be a 'carbon print'.  I don't know if you ever
> heard of these.  I believe they are somewhat akin to a 'carbo' print,.  Which is
> to say a type of transfer process using carbon pigment inks are the emulsion.
> Quite beautiful, very stable, and *very* difficult to make.
> 
> But you can see how calling an inkjet print made with carbon pigment inks could
> be confused actual 'carbon' prints with your proposed labeling system.
> 
> And again, calling something a black & white photograph does nt inform.  I can
> think of at least 5 different methods of making a black & white photo (including
> inkjet technology), and all of them require different methods to achieve and
> archive.
> 
> Again, inform and educate, not generalize and obfuscate.
> 
> And as far as your feeling that 'inkjet' sounds cheap and easy cheap, so is
> 'photograph'...Go to any 1 hour lab or drugstore.  In my opinion, *that* is no
> excuse.
> 
> Harvey Ferdschneider
> partner, SKID Photography, NYC
> 
> >  They used to be called Black and White Photographs.
> >
> > Carbon Pigment is also descriptive of the method used to make the print.
> >
> > Anyhoo, sounds better than Inkjet print, which most people (non photo
> > types) think are cheaply made-anyone-can-do-that prints.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SKID Photography wrote:
> > >
> > > Jerry,
> > > But you have admit, 'Silver Gelatin Print' *is* descriptive of the type of
> > > photograph, as compared to Platinum, or Palladium, or Bromoil etc.
> > >
> > > The point of the labels are to describe and inform, and you must agree that
> > > Silver Gelatin Print is informative...What would you have them call
> > > them.....'pictures'?  ;-D  <vbg>
> > >
> > > Harvey Ferdschneider
> > > partner, SKID Photography, NYC
> > >
> > > >  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.
> > > > > > > >
> >
> 
> [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/