Digital BW, The Print

Oh. I don't know John. No offense taken but fade can be a relative thing. Perhaps even serendipitous. A case in point: In my living room I have a large print I made some 40 years ago now. It's a winter scene of a river through a wooded area with frosted branches of trees and snow on the ground with the river open but dark. I chose to blue tone the print at the time. As it was intended to be only a very temporary decoration, it was quickly made with no thought of longevity and I used a fugitive iron toner rather than gold toning it. Well,it's been fading slowly, but to my eye noticeably, for about 20 years now with the blue reverting back to gray via a cyanish intermediate in midtones. Surprisingly to me I still like the print as do others(probably those you offended had they but known it;-)).
Last summer I decided it was about time to renew it so I did and made a new one all pert and pretty. The old one is still up. Damned if I don't still like the old one. Maybe it's just one antique admiring the patina on another.

Regards,
Duane



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Cone" <jon@...> wrote:
>
 But a 35% fade I find equally and universally insulting because art and photographs in that general condition of fade are worthy of a garbage bin rather than "easily noticeable fade". I hate that I made that kind of remark. 
> 
> Jon