Digital BW, The Print

>
> 2) Which outfits do you shoot with personally? I'm very close to
> thinking about using some Holga shots and doing piezography on toy
> cameras??? A joke perhaps but worthwhile shot...
>
Hi Alfie,
I have some stuff on my website www.foundobjectsgallery.com all shot with a
Holga then printed on Photorag with MIS FS inks and the piezo plugin - works
for me! Gilbert's stuff is great - he posts to the streetphoto list on
topica and even in the jpegs his scans are great.

Julian

Hi Julian,

I enjoyed your Holga stuff very much ;)! Tells me how creative a toy 
camera with exceptional printing can make the difference. Reminds me 
of a distorted Kertesz or funky Atget.

Your resultant piezography is stunning. I have come to the conclusion 
that the method of printing is just as important if not more so than 
the equipment being used. Plus the Leica dopeheads (I use Leica but 
not buying into the god status people worship it at) talk too much 
about collecting and trading lenses. A sharp lens isn't worth it if 
the printing is lousy.

Plus I rather spend my money on a good Epson printer over a Noctilux 
anyday... :) Well by the way my Kodak DC3200 is becoming my digital 
Holga especially when shot at f3.4 in near darkness! :)

Alfie

> >
> Hi Alfie,
> I have some stuff on my website www.foundobjectsgallery.com all 
shot with a
> Holga then printed on Photorag with MIS FS inks and the piezo 
plugin - works
> for me! Gilbert's stuff is great - he posts to the streetphoto list 
on

> topica and even in the jpegs his scans are great.
> 
> Julian

(I use Leica but
> not buying into the god status people worship it at)
I used to use leica Ms but now only use MF. if you are into streetshooting
check out  http://www.topica.com/lists/streetphoto a lot of digital BW
printers on there.

Julian

> > 4) What made you switch from silver halide based processes to digital?
>
> Quality is better than the darkroom. MUCH better selection of papers.

For papers, I agree.  For film, I do not agree, and believe you still get
better results (tonality, resolution etc.) from scanning film, ESPECIALLY
B&W.

Regards,

Austin

Hi Alfie,

> 1) Does anyone here use digital cameras and output into piezography
> (preferably Cone's inks I'm more interested in...)?

Many use it, but other methods are just as good, and far less expensive. (especially
inks).  The VM and FS MIS inks along with Paul Roark's curves will
easily equal piezography quality.  So you have a lot of inks to choose
from. There must be at least a dozen different black and white inksets
out there now, and hundreds of papers!

> 2) Which outfits do you shoot with personally? I'm very close to
> thinking about using some Holga shots and doing piezography on toy
> cameras??? A joke perhaps but worthwhile shot...

 Canon D60's or Nikon D 100 are best for reasonably priced pro digital
cameras, and the quality of the prints they make is outstanding. Not
into the Holga stuff, never seen a holga picture I liked. I guess it's
just not my cup of tea.

> 3) What perked your interested in digital black and white printing?

Quality is better than the darkroom now. MUCH better selection of papers!	
> 
> 4) What made you switch from silver halide based processes to digital?

Quality is better than the darkroom. MUCH better selection of papers. 

> 5) Why do die-hard traditionalists object to digital black and white
> prints? Tonality range? Shadow detail blockage? etc. etc.?

Shadow detail is better than traditional photography, so is highlight detail.
Most gallerys don't accept them YET because of archival/permanence
problems that have been associated with inkjet printing. That's slowly
changing now, and there are several systems that offer permanence to
100+ years. Traditionalists are usually people who just don't want to
change. They like what they're doing and want to stay there.  I was that
way with autofocus cameras until I actually tried one.  Change is
difficult for some people. 

Besides, what you can do in photoshop is unbelieveable, and down right FUN!!!

Jerry

http://www.westernechoes.com

> Thanks for your help and I look forward to working and learning (more
> of that) from the intelligent folks here who are more experienced
> than I am!
>

Which is extremely amusing considering that just because 
someone prints on fibrebased silver papers does not 
necessarily mean that the image has been processed to any 
archival standards. I have come across a number of 'senior' fine 
art photographers who have little respect (or knowledge) of 
processing silver papers properly. New photographers who have 
only experienced RC papers face the same issue.

Also, look at the number of galleries carrying contemporary 
C-prints...which certainly do not have the same permanence as 
quadtones on rag papers.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson 
<jerryolson@r...> wrote:

> Most gallerys don't accept them YET because of 
archival/permanence
> problems that have been associated with inkjet printing. 


jamie drouin : photographs
http://www.jamiedrouin.com

Jamie, I don't think most gallery owners know a lot about photography.
If they did, they Certainly would NOT be selling C prints over quad
prints because of longevity!
Generations Has been tested by RIT Kodak for 100+ years. This is
certainly good enough for me!  There are always those that think a print
should last 500 years. But really, who really cares? About a year ago, I
looked at all the color photos I had taken when at Brooks Institute. My
entire C color print portfolio had faded so much it was unbelievable.
I'd say about 80 percent fade. And these prints were properly processed
and washed, and kept in the dark for 25 years!!!. My dye transfer prints
look as good as the day I made them, as do the black and white prints.
All my quad prints that have been in books, or in low level room
lighting haven't faded a bit that I can tell. 

Jerry



jamiedrouin wrote:

> 
> Which is extremely amusing considering that just because
> someone prints on fibrebased silver papers does not
> necessarily mean that the image has been processed to any
> archival standards. I have come across a number of 'senior' fine
> art photographers who have little respect (or knowledge) of
> processing silver papers properly. New photographers who have
> only experienced RC papers face the same issue.
> 
> Also, look at the number of galleries carrying contemporary
> C-prints...which certainly do not have the same permanence as
> quadtones on rag papers.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson
> <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> 
> > Most gallerys don't accept them YET because of
> archival/permanence
> > problems that have been associated with inkjet printing.
> 
> jamie drouin : photographs
> http://www.jamiedrouin.com
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> 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 &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - 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/

> 1) Does anyone here use digital cameras and output into piezography
> (preferably Cone's inks I'm more interested in...)?

I use an Olympus E-10 output to Piezo on an 1160 using MIS FSN inks.

> 3) What perked your interested in digital black and white printing?

Being able to leverage my experience with Adobe Photoshop

> 4) What made you switch from silver halide based processes to digital?

Endless darkroom test strips & guesswork vs. precise digital tools; plus no
chemical baths!

> 5) Why do die-hard traditionalists object to digital black and white
> prints? Tonality range? Shadow detail blockage? etc. etc.?

Myopic old-paradigm clinging?

> Thanks

your welcome,
-BK