Digital BW, The Print

Jerry:

I appreciate your input to my query for information about printing on 
uncoated papers. In your message, you bring up a good point for 
discussion...What is a satisfactory print?

During the years I've been doing traditional wet darkroom silver 
photography, many times I've heard the term 'technically perfect 
print'. It usually referred to the Ansel Adams stipulation that a 
photographic print should be grainless, full depth of focus, detail 
in the shadows, printed on cold black and white silver-rich paper, 
mounted on pure white mat board, etc....

When I got into digital printing, I accepted that it was a new 
medium. I'm not trying to copy photography, duplicate the silver 
look. I have no loyalty to photography, or a set of standards other 
than my own, which is to try to express a feeling in my art. Step 
wedges are ok, zone system is ok...but if the resulting finished 
piece is 'dead' in it's soul, then it is of no use. What I'm trying 
to communicate here is that the field is totally wide-open...with the 
pinnacle of purpose for me being...get the feeling in the work. 

How black does black have to be to equate a feeling? Does detail in 
the shadows make more or less feeling? Can a soft print express deep 
feeling? If glossy paper makes the best detail, but it's plastic 
appearance spoils the aesthetics I was trying to imbue into the work, 
then I failed!

you get my point...I want a knowledge of this new medium, it's 
limitations, so I can find my own place within it and still be loyal 
to my purpose of expression. If it has to be the look of a watercolor 
or charcoal drawing, instead of a photograph, then maybe I've found a 
new path to express myself. Making art for me is a wild exploration 
into my self...it cannot be fettered by old science and dogmas. 

The stipulations put on traditional photography by its icons, its 
schools, and its market has always been curious to me. Other forms of 
art: painting, sculpture, drawing...don't have these stipulations. It 
is difficult to go beyond the limits of the camera, the accepted 
precepts of a medium....but how else will we express a unique vision?

ken


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson 
<jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> Ken, doubt you'll ever get satisfactory prints on uncoated papers. 
You'd be the first one to do so,....

Paradigm shift.  If you want fuzzy prints with posterization...then uncoated
papers are the way to go!

$^)>


On 9/19/01 11:59 AM, "ken@..." <ken@...> wrote:

> Jerry:
> 
> I appreciate your input to my query for information about printing on
> uncoated papers. In your message, you bring up a good point for
> discussion...What is a satisfactory print?
> 
> During the years I've been doing traditional wet darkroom silver
> photography, many times I've heard the term 'technically perfect
> print'. It usually referred to the Ansel Adams stipulation that a
> photographic print should be grainless, full depth of focus, detail
> in the shadows, printed on cold black and white silver-rich paper,
> mounted on pure white mat board, etc....
> 
> When I got into digital printing, I accepted that it was a new
> medium. I'm not trying to copy photography, duplicate the silver
> look. I have no loyalty to photography, or a set of standards other
> than my own, which is to try to express a feeling in my art. Step
> wedges are ok, zone system is ok...but if the resulting finished
> piece is 'dead' in it's soul, then it is of no use. What I'm trying
> to communicate here is that the field is totally wide-open...with the
> pinnacle of purpose for me being...get the feeling in the work.
> 
> How black does black have to be to equate a feeling? Does detail in
> the shadows make more or less feeling? Can a soft print express deep
> feeling? If glossy paper makes the best detail, but it's plastic
> appearance spoils the aesthetics I was trying to imbue into the work,
> then I failed!
> 
> you get my point...I want a knowledge of this new medium, it's
> limitations, so I can find my own place within it and still be loyal
> to my purpose of expression. If it has to be the look of a watercolor
> or charcoal drawing, instead of a photograph, then maybe I've found a
> new path to express myself. Making art for me is a wild exploration
> into my self...it cannot be fettered by old science and dogmas.
> 
> The stipulations put on traditional photography by its icons, its
> schools, and its market has always been curious to me. Other forms of
> art: painting, sculpture, drawing...don't have these stipulations. It
> is difficult to go beyond the limits of the camera, the accepted
> precepts of a medium....but how else will we express a unique vision?
> 
> ken
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson
> <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
>> Ken, doubt you'll ever get satisfactory prints on uncoated papers.
> You'd be the first one to do so,....
> 
> 
> 
> 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/
> 
> 

----------------------
Robert Morrison
rmorrison@...

310-397-2704

4131 Bledsoe Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90066

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., ken@k... wrote:
> Jerry:
> 
> I appreciate your input to my query for information about printing
on 
> uncoated papers. In your message, you bring up a good point for 
> discussion...What is a satisfactory print?

snip

Nice post Ken. I can only add that if people could see your work
(post your URL?) they might realize you are not as bound by 
some of the "standards" many other photographers feel compelled to
meet.
Your wide open approach to the possibilities of craft suit your work
well, and are worth consideration by all.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Robert Morrison <rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> Paradigm shift.  If you want fuzzy prints with posterization...then uncoated
> papers are the way to go!

It is certainly possible to get the same results on coated paper. If you are implying that these results are always 
"achieved" with uncoated papers, I can only suggest you haven't seen anyone do it right.
There are many different print aesthetics out there, usually something to be learned from them all.
Tyler

Ken, To me, if a print doesn't have a satisfying black, it's a failure,
unless it is an obvious high key print. It the deepest black in most
landscapes is only a dark charcoal gray, it is a failure. There seem to
be several papers capable of making a satisfying black, that are not
glossy. Most of them have other flaws of some kind. THere seems to be no
perfect paper as yet. I would put it this way. I am not able to get a
satisfactory print for a lot of my pictures on Somerset Enhanced or
Museo papers. If the images have large areas of black, these papers just
cannot deliver it. Large areas of black look just terrible if they are
only a very dark gray. Torchon, or Epson Archival or Eclipse, can
deliver a pretty good black. Most Hahanem\ufffdhle papers can, but several of
them have other problems, usually flaking or they scuff too easily. 

I'm after the blacks of a selenium toned Oriental Seagull, Agfa Brovira,
Kodak Elite, DuPont Varigam, or Ilford Gallerie black. IF the Inkjet
print comes very close to those blacks, I'll be happy, If not, I won't
be. 

There are exceptions. An obviously high key print wouldn't matter nearly
as much as an image that really NEEDED a strong black to look good. Some
high key images would need nothing more than a middle gray to white
range. 

JErry





ken@... wrote:

> 
> Jerry:
> 
> I appreciate your input to my query for information about printing on
> uncoated papers. In your message, you bring up a good point for
> discussion...What is a satisfactory print?
> 
> During the years I've been doing traditional wet darkroom silver
> photography, many times I've heard the term 'technically perfect
> print'. It usually referred to the Ansel Adams stipulation that a
> photographic print should be grainless, full depth of focus, detail
> in the shadows, printed on cold black and white silver-rich paper,
> mounted on pure white mat board, etc....
> 
> When I got into digital printing, I accepted that it was a new
> medium. I'm not trying to copy photography, duplicate the silver
> look. I have no loyalty to photography, or a set of standards other
> than my own, which is to try to express a feeling in my art. Step
> wedges are ok, zone system is ok...but if the resulting finished
> piece is 'dead' in it's soul, then it is of no use. What I'm trying
> to communicate here is that the field is totally wide-open...with the
> pinnacle of purpose for me being...get the feeling in the work.
> 
> How black does black have to be to equate a feeling? Does detail in
> the shadows make more or less feeling? Can a soft print express deep
> feeling? If glossy paper makes the best detail, but it's plastic
> appearance spoils the aesthetics I was trying to imbue into the work,
> then I failed!
> 
> you get my point...I want a knowledge of this new medium, it's
> limitations, so I can find my own place within it and still be loyal
> to my purpose of expression. If it has to be the look of a watercolor
> or charcoal drawing, instead of a photograph, then maybe I've found a
> new path to express myself. Making art for me is a wild exploration
> into my self...it cannot be fettered by old science and dogmas.
> 
> The stipulations put on traditional photography by its icons, its
> schools, and its market has always been curious to me. Other forms of
> art: painting, sculpture, drawing...don't have these stipulations. It
> is difficult to go beyond the limits of the camera, the accepted
> precepts of a medium....but how else will we express a unique vision?
> 
> ken
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson
> <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> > Ken, doubt you'll ever get satisfactory prints on uncoated papers.
> You'd be the first one to do so,....
> 
> 
> 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/

Hi Tyler:
I thought the discussions of this post might cause us to explore what 
we're each trying to do with our work...to challenge us and make us 
better communicators. It is personal for each of us, and I'm not 
advocating any certain approach for anyone else. 

My website has no imagery created with a digital medium...it is all 
silver work...much of it split-toned, or handcolored black and white, 
so maybe it's not welcome on this board...but it's 
http://www.kensmithart.com

My digitally-printed fine art work will not include any of the work 
from my past...but will only be used to print future work, with this 
new medium in mind. 

ken


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> 
wrote:

> Nice post Ken. I can only add that if people could see your work
> (post your URL?) they might realize you are not as bound by 
> some of the "standards" many other photographers feel compelled to
> meet.
> Your wide open approach to the possibilities of craft suit your work
> well, and are worth consideration by all.
> Tyler

>
>
>Nice post Ken. I can only add that if people could see your work
>(post your URL?) they might realize you are not as bound by
>some of the "standards" many other photographers feel compelled to
>meet.
>Your wide open approach to the possibilities of craft suit your work
>well, and are worth consideration by all.
>Tyler
>

FWIW, I also think Ken should post his URL, I think the images there 
are real eye openers.

Jerry.

Jerry,
When I look at the surface of uncoated paper, such as somerset 
velvet, with an 8X agfalupe, I see what I would describe as 'hairs' 
on the surface. These 'hairs' that rise from the surface are almost 
translucent, even tho the paper has been printed on. Maybe they don't 
all absorb ink! Besides the dot gain, this 'veiled' surface may 
reflect the look of softness, also graying. Maybe coatings help to 
smooth away this affect, with glossy paper doing away with it 
completely. 

not science, just a micro-observation,
ken


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson 
<jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> Ken, To me, if a print doesn't have a satisfying black, it's a 
failure,
> unless it is an obvious high key print. It the deepest black in most
> landscapes is only a dark charcoal gray, it is a failure. There 
seem to
> be several papers capable of making a satisfying black, that are not
> glossy. Most of them have other flaws of some kind. THere seems to 
be no
> perfect paper as yet....

on 9/19/01 4:38 PM, ken@... wrote:

> My website has no imagery created with a digital medium...it is all
> silver work...much of it split-toned, or handcolored black and white,
> so maybe it's not welcome on this board...but it's
> http://www.kensmithart.com


GORGEOUS!

Todd

I think Ken does produce Perfect Prints...to his own aesthetic senibility...and I like them very much.  

I agree with Tyler and Ken too that there are many possibilities in this art that do not need to be bound by some dictates from an individual or school of photography.  Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (cliche of the day).

Steadman
  Tyler wrote: 
  > 
  > I appreciate your input to my query for information about printing
  on 
  > uncoated papers. In your message, you bring up a good point for 
  > discussion...What is a satisfactory print?

  snip

  Nice post Ken. I can only add that if people could see your work
  (post your URL?) they might realize you are not as bound by 
  some of the "standards" many other photographers feel compelled to
  meet.
  Your wide open approach to the possibilities of craft suit your work
  well, and are worth consideration by all.
  Tyler





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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., ken@k... wrote:
> Hi Tyler:
> I thought the discussions of this post might cause us to explore what 
> we're each trying to do with our work...to challenge us and make us 
> better communicators. It is personal for each of us, and I'm not 
> advocating any certain approach for anyone else. 

Thank you for sharing your site with us Ken, and I agree with your thoughts. It's interesting that we have seen some of each 
others prints, have very different expectations from our craft (mine more aligned with those who seemed to be disturbed 
by another standard), and still find value in observing the other.
However, since your's is the more adventuresome, I suspect I'm getting the better deal!
Whatever we do to expand our ability to create (seeing, etc.) shouldn't end when it's time to put something on paper. 
Caponigro (Sr.), no matter how traditional his niche, threw away the rules and remained open to all possibilities when he 
hit the darkroom and worked with every imaginable combination of materials until something special and unexpected 
emerged.
Tyler

Ken,

Very nice post and a wonderful website. I took the liberty of adding 
it to the Group's "Bookmarks" under "Photographers"

Your remarks underscore the importance of having as many different 
materials available as possible. We need to be very receptive to new 
ideas and attentive to the workflows and results of everyone 
wandering around in this new territory.

A satisfactory print has as many definitions as there are 
photographers and, for many, it changes daily.

Martin Wesley




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., ken@k... wrote:
> Jerry:
> 
> I appreciate your input to my query for information about printing 
on 
> uncoated papers. In your message, you bring up a good point for 
> discussion...What is a satisfactory print?
> 
(snip)

Its a  little late, but you all just Missed Ken Smiths exhibit at the Benham 
Gallery Seattle. It came down Last weekend. You don't get in this gallery 
unless you have something unique to offer. Ken is a veteran exhibitor and 
this latest work is his finest, I believe. I'am sure Ken will come up with 
some very nice work on uncoated paper. I t was only a couple years ago that 
uncoated paper was all there was and Iris was king. Once he sees the 
possibilities and its limitations I think he will create to fit the medium. I 
Know myself ,I think differently now(well maybe I always did) When shooting I 
think how is it going to look in ink? Than after its printed I sometimes now 
think how would it look in silver? I guy could go insane trying to be 
creative and make the new more daring stuff...Inks seems to make it easier to 
do something different.Hats off to Ken, Technically perfect? The image better 
have more going for it than that!
Steve M

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., sdmey4@a... wrote:
> Its a  little late, but you all just Missed Ken Smiths exhibit at the Benham 
> Gallery Seattle. It came down Last weekend. You don't get in this gallery 
> unless you have something unique to offer.

Steve is too modest to mention that he is also represented by this gallery, and definitly has something unique to offer.
Yup, up here in the Northwest, it's just one big love fest...
... so anyway...

Tyler

Yeah, it's a love fest....
Somewhere I read that's what making art is all about. 
Steve, you are too modest! And, you are encouraging in that you also 
are taking the leap into ink, and SELLING some of them!
The goals are all similar - expressing our own unique vision (and 
surviving, haha).

ken


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> 
wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., sdmey4@a... wrote:
> > Its a  little late, but you all just Missed Ken Smiths exhibit at 
the Benham 
> > Gallery Seattle. It came down Last weekend. You don't get in this 
gallery 
> > unless you have something unique to offer.
> 
> Steve is too modest to mention that he is also represented by this 
gallery, and definitly has something unique to offer.

> Yup, up here in the Northwest, it's just one big love fest...
> ... so anyway...
> 
> Tyler

I like the nudes Ken. I think these images could work on uncoated paper, but
the blacks won't be there unless you coat the final print...which if you are
using uncoated paper for the feel...you probably don't want to do.  But then
again you may not care about the deepest blacks given the images on the
site.  I may have missed this already...if so sorry...but why uncoated
papers?

Robert

On 9/19/01 1:59 PM, "Todd Flashner" <tflash@...> wrote:

> on 9/19/01 4:38 PM, ken@... wrote:
> 
>> My website has no imagery created with a digital medium...it is all
>> silver work...much of it split-toned, or handcolored black and white,
>> so maybe it's not welcome on this board...but it's
>> http://www.kensmithart.com
> 
> 
> GORGEOUS!
> 
> Todd
> 
> 
> 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/
> 
> 

----------------------
Robert Morrison
rmorrison@...

310-397-2704

4131 Bledsoe Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90066

Robert:
Well, besides the tactileness, my reason for uncoated papers is that 
they are deckled...I want it for it's presentation, some ideas I 
have. But, coated papers don't have deckled edges...

You suggested in an email to me, that I check with Kami Henson at 
photoinkjet.com...that they were going to offer some coated papers 
with deckle edges....

a part of her reply:

"Coming soon, will be the Brightcube Deckled Fine Art papers.  They 
aren't scheduled for production until after Christmas though.  The 
Brightcube Eclipse papers are what we will be going to deckle, so you 
can opt to try out some samples of Eclipse Satine or Velvet to see if 
you'll like the surface of our new deckled papers."

...so there are seemingly lots of ways to go, each with its own 
twist. Deckle rulers to make my own from coated papers/ deckled 
coated papers/ and the nice feel of deckled uncoated papers. Now I 
have information overload!! Better keep the printers humming!

thanks,
ken 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Robert Morrison 
<rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> I like the nudes Ken. I think these images could work on uncoated 
paper, but
> the blacks won't be there unless you coat the final print...which 
if you are
> using uncoated paper for the feel...you probably don't want to do.  
But then
> again you may not care about the deepest blacks given the images on 
the
> site.  I may have missed this already...if so sorry...but why 
uncoated

> papers?
> 
> Robert

I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful' image.
To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to evoke.

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC

Jerry Olson wrote:

> Ken, To me, if a print doesn't have a satisfying black, it's a failure,
> unless it is an obvious high key print. It the deepest black in most
> landscapes is only a dark charcoal gray, it is a failure. There seem to
> be several papers capable of making a satisfying black, that are not
> glossy. Most of them have other flaws of some kind. THere seems to be no
> perfect paper as yet. I would put it this way. I am not able to get a
> satisfactory print for a lot of my pictures on Somerset Enhanced or
> Museo papers. If the images have large areas of black, these papers just
> cannot deliver it. Large areas of black look just terrible if they are
> only a very dark gray. Torchon, or Epson Archival or Eclipse, can
> deliver a pretty good black. Most Hahanemühle papers can, but several of
> them have other problems, usually flaking or they scuff too easily.
>
> I'm after the blacks of a selenium toned Oriental Seagull, Agfa Brovira,
> Kodak Elite, DuPont Varigam, or Ilford Gallerie black. IF the Inkjet
> print comes very close to those blacks, I'll be happy, If not, I won't
> be.
>
> There are exceptions. An obviously high key print wouldn't matter nearly
> as much as an image that really NEEDED a strong black to look good. Some
> high key images would need nothing more than a middle gray to white
> range.
>
> JErry
>
>
>


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

Ken, try a sheet or two of Arches Bright White paper. It's uncoated, but
gives a decent black. It doesn't handle really smooth tones too great,
as they can look grainy. On the other hand, if that doesn't concern you,
you may be happy with it. It's archival, acid free, has deckles, etc.


Jerry




ken@... wrote:

> 
> Robert:
> Well, besides the tactileness, my reason for uncoated papers is that
> they are deckled...I want it for it's presentation, some ideas I
> have. But, coated papers don't have deckled edges...
> 
> You suggested in an email to me, that I check with Kami Henson at
> photoinkjet.com...that they were going to offer some coated papers
> with deckle edges....
> 
> a part of her reply:
> 
> "Coming soon, will be the Brightcube Deckled Fine Art papers.  They
> aren't scheduled for production until after Christmas though.  The
> Brightcube Eclipse papers are what we will be going to deckle, so you
> can opt to try out some samples of Eclipse Satine or Velvet to see if
> you'll like the surface of our new deckled papers."
> 
> ...so there are seemingly lots of ways to go, each with its own
> twist. Deckle rulers to make my own from coated papers/ deckled
> coated papers/ and the nice feel of deckled uncoated papers. Now I
> have information overload!! Better keep the printers humming!
> 
> thanks,
> ken
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Robert Morrison
> <rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> > I like the nudes Ken. I think these images could work on uncoated
> paper, but
> > the blacks won't be there unless you coat the final print...which
> if you are
> > using uncoated paper for the feel...you probably don't want to do.
> But then
> > again you may not care about the deepest blacks given the images on
> the
> > site.  I may have missed this already...if so sorry...but why
> uncoated
> > papers?
> >
> > Robert
> 
> 
> 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/

Harvey,

Try to imagine one of Ansel Adams prints without a proper black. Think
it would be impressive? If he just had charcoal grays where blacks
should have been, I doubt if he would have been considered a good
printer. Most (but not all) landscapes need that deep black to make a
satisfying print.  And please keep in mind I did not say ALL prints
should have a deep black.

At school, we were always taught that a proper print, except high key
prints, should have a paper white, a full range of grays, and a black,
somewhere in the print that was as deep as the paper could produce.

In fact if a print did not have these qualities, it was an automatic
reprint. I had Boris Dobro as a teacher, and he was a master printer.
World Class.

Jerry



SKID Photography wrote:

> 
> I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful' image.
> To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to evoke.
>nfo/terms/

Jerry -

  I taught photography and large format workshops across the US for several years and have to completely disagree with the statements you make on "the proper print" having certain tonal values. (yes, I read your exceptions but I feel like making comments) Now...that said...I have to mention that I used to believe this too until I started looking at some platinum and other types of prints which were deep in mid-tones and repleat of whites and blacks. My own style is fairly Adams/Sexton/Weston (yeh, right) and Piezo printing took some time to accept but I have learned that the old school of needing a dmax and dmin is probably not reasonable as a rule. I'm getting better about judging the image and not the tones. I used to preach this to students and now have to take the advice myself. I used to get stuck on getting a dmax and dmin and noticed later that the image stunk. <G>

Brian

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jerry Olson 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:23 AM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers


  Harvey,

  Try to imagine one of Ansel Adams prints without a proper black. Think
  it would be impressive? If he just had charcoal grays where blacks
  should have been, I doubt if he would have been considered a good
  printer. Most (but not all) landscapes need that deep black to make a
  satisfying print.  And please keep in mind I did not say ALL prints
  should have a deep black.

  At school, we were always taught that a proper print, except high key
  prints, should have a paper white, a full range of grays, and a black,
  somewhere in the print that was as deep as the paper could produce.

  In fact if a print did not have these qualities, it was an automatic
  reprint. I had Boris Dobro as a teacher, and he was a master printer.
  World Class.

  Jerry



  SKID Photography wrote:
  > 
  > I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful' image.
  > To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to evoke.
  >nfo/terms/

  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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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

Jerry:
Thank you so much for your suggestions, also Cheap Joes... There is a 
ton of information, and alot of friendly advice from this group...I'm 
sure I'll find a solution soon. I may use a combination of papers, 
coated  & uncoated. Different aesthetic purposes. 
thanks again,
ken


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson 
<jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> Ken, try a sheet or two of Arches Bright White paper. It's 
uncoated, but
> gives a decent black. It doesn't handle really smooth tones too 
great,
> as they can look grainy. On the other hand, if that doesn't concern 
you,
> you may be happy with it. It's archival, acid free, has deckles, 
etc.

> 
> 
> Jerry

Ken, if you EVER find a truly satisfactory uncoated paper that gives
deep blacks and smooth tones, please do tell us what it is! 

I've never tried the Japanese papers, as they are so expensive. But with
Cheap joes, the prices are about as low as you'll find them. Ask for
their paper catalogue, it's impressive.

Jerry



ken@... wrote:

> 
> Jerry:
> Thank you so much for your suggestions, also Cheap Joes... There is a
> ton of information, and alot of friendly advice from this group...I'm
> sure I'll find a solution soon. I may use a combination of papers,
> coated  & uncoated. Different aesthetic purposes.
> thanks again,
> ken
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson
> <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> > Ken, try a sheet or two of Arches Bright White paper. It's
> uncoated, but
> > gives a decent black. It doesn't handle really smooth tones too
> great,
> > as they can look grainy. On the other hand, if that doesn't concern
> you,
> > you may be happy with it. It's archival, acid free, has deckles,
> etc.
> >
> >
> > Jerry
> 
> 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/

We'll just have to agree to disagree, Brian. I also used to teach
photography a long time ago (University of North Dakota). I feel my
Brooks training was a great help. I love the F64 look, and the Ansel
Adams print look. I don't like platinum prints at all. (At least all the
ones I have seen} were gray/brown and muddy as hell. Very
unsatisfactory, to me. I don't care how great the mid tones are, without
a deep black, I just don't like the print. Now high key prints are a
different story. I totally agree they don't have to have a deep black. I
just cannot imagine one of the classic Ansel Adams images without a deep
black. I wouldn't even want to see one, as I know I wouldn't like it.

Maybe I have never seen a really great platinum print. I haven't seen
many. But if it is anything like the ones I have seen, I wouldn't like it.

Jerry






Brian Mikiten wrote:

> 
> Jerry -
> 
>   I taught photography and large format workshops across the US for several years and have to completely disagree with the statements you make on "the proper print" having certain tonal values. (yes, I read your exceptions but I feel like making comments) Now...that said...I have to mention that I used to believe this too until I started looking at some platinum and other types of prints which were deep in mid-tones and repleat of whites and blacks. My own style is fairly Adams/Sexton/Weston (yeh, right) and Piezo printing took some time to accept but I have learned that the old school of needing a dmax and dmin is probably not reasonable as a rule. I'm getting better about judging the image and not the tones. I used to preach this to students and now have to take the advice myself. I used to get stuck on getting a dmax and dmin and noticed later that the image stunk. <G>
> 
> Brian
> 
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Jerry Olson
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:23 AM
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers
> 
>   Harvey,
> 
>   Try to imagine one of Ansel Adams prints without a proper black. Think
>   it would be impressive? If he just had charcoal grays where blacks
>   should have been, I doubt if he would have been considered a good
>   printer. Most (but not all) landscapes need that deep black to make a
>   satisfying print.  And please keep in mind I did not say ALL prints
>   should have a deep black.
> 
>   At school, we were always taught that a proper print, except high key
>   prints, should have a paper white, a full range of grays, and a black,
>   somewhere in the print that was as deep as the paper could produce.
> 
>   In fact if a print did not have these qualities, it was an automatic
>   reprint. I had Boris Dobro as a teacher, and he was a master printer.
>   World Class.
> 
>   Jerry
> 
>   SKID Photography wrote:
>   >
>   > I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful' image.
>   > To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to evoke.
>   >nfo/terms/
> 
>   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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> 
> [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/

Jerry -

  No problem. I think my point should have been directed more towards the fact that I had problems "warming up" <G> to piezo than anything else because of the issue of print tone. When I hold a piezo print next to one of my Oriental/Selenium toned prints, it is different - not necessarily bad but different. I have a print of a worker's glove stuck in a puddle of tar that in a silver print is stunning. As a Piezo print on several types of paper it has serious problems. On the otherhand, one of my more popular prints of a church here in Texas is actually quite nice on Piezo. Again, I equate much of what I see in Piezo to be more like a platinum print than a straight silver print because of the black/white issue.

Thanks!

Brian

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jerry Olson 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:47 AM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers


  We'll just have to agree to disagree, Brian. I also used to teach
  photography a long time ago (University of North Dakota). I feel my
  Brooks training was a great help. I love the F64 look, and the Ansel
  Adams print look. I don't like platinum prints at all. (At least all the
  ones I have seen} were gray/brown and muddy as hell. Very
  unsatisfactory, to me. I don't care how great the mid tones are, without
  a deep black, I just don't like the print. Now high key prints are a
  different story. I totally agree they don't have to have a deep black. I
  just cannot imagine one of the classic Ansel Adams images without a deep
  black. I wouldn't even want to see one, as I know I wouldn't like it.

  Maybe I have never seen a really great platinum print. I haven't seen
  many. But if it is anything like the ones I have seen, I wouldn't like it.

  Jerry






  Brian Mikiten wrote:
  > 
  > Jerry -
  > 
  >   I taught photography and large format workshops across the US for several years and have to completely disagree with the statements you make on "the proper print" having certain tonal values. (yes, I read your exceptions but I feel like making comments) Now...that said...I have to mention that I used to believe this too until I started looking at some platinum and other types of prints which were deep in mid-tones and repleat of whites and blacks. My own style is fairly Adams/Sexton/Weston (yeh, right) and Piezo printing took some time to accept but I have learned that the old school of needing a dmax and dmin is probably not reasonable as a rule. I'm getting better about judging the image and not the tones. I used to preach this to students and now have to take the advice myself. I used to get stuck on getting a dmax and dmin and noticed later that the image stunk. <G>
  > 
  > Brian
  > 
  >   ----- Original Message -----
  >   From: Jerry Olson
  >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  >   Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:23 AM
  >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers
  > 
  >   Harvey,
  > 
  >   Try to imagine one of Ansel Adams prints without a proper black. Think
  >   it would be impressive? If he just had charcoal grays where blacks
  >   should have been, I doubt if he would have been considered a good
  >   printer. Most (but not all) landscapes need that deep black to make a
  >   satisfying print.  And please keep in mind I did not say ALL prints
  >   should have a deep black.
  > 
  >   At school, we were always taught that a proper print, except high key
  >   prints, should have a paper white, a full range of grays, and a black,
  >   somewhere in the print that was as deep as the paper could produce.
  > 
  >   In fact if a print did not have these qualities, it was an automatic
  >   reprint. I had Boris Dobro as a teacher, and he was a master printer.
  >   World Class.
  > 
  >   Jerry
  > 
  >   SKID Photography wrote:
  >   >
  >   > I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful' image.
  >   > To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to evoke.
  >   >nfo/terms/
  > 
  >   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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  > 
  > [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/

  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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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

Brian,

I am still going through the silver-to-inkjet transition myself. 
Personally I always preferred smooth silver to platinum or matte 
silver. I have seen many wonderful platinum and matte prints that I 
would love to hang on my wall, but that was not the direction my own 
vision took. For those of us who worked exclusively in smooth silver, 
I think the move to inkjet is a harder one than for those who have 
worked in platinum, silver matte or other mediums with a lower 
dynamic range.

Your comments about your two prints leads to my question.

After someone has been pursuing photography for awhile, they come 
across shots or compositions that would be really great, but from 
experience they know that there is no way they can pull it off 
technically and get it convincingly on a piece of paper, so they 
don't bother to take the shot.

Are you finding that since the end result is different than silver 
you are "seeing" and shooting differently than you did for silver? 
And if you have changed, was this a conscious change or something 
that evolved more spontaneously?

Martin Wesley



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Brian Mikiten" 
<bmikiten@s...> wrote:
> Jerry -
> 
>   No problem. I think my point should have been directed more 
towards the fact that I had problems "warming up" <G> to piezo than 
anything else because of the issue of print tone. When I hold a piezo 
print next to one of my Oriental/Selenium toned prints, it is 
different - not necessarily bad but different. I have a print of a 
worker's glove stuck in a puddle of tar that in a silver print is 
stunning. As a Piezo print on several types of paper it has serious 
problems. On the otherhand, one of my more popular prints of a church 
here in Texas is actually quite nice on Piezo. Again, I equate much 
of what I see in Piezo to be more like a platinum print than a 
straight silver print because of the black/white issue.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Brian
> 
(snip)

Brian, I have only seen a half dozen or so platinum prints, and have no
idea if they were  high quality prints or not. There just wasn't
anything approaching a black in the print, and it looked gray and muddy.

Jerry

I know piezo prints and silver prints are totally different animals and
we shouldn't, (but we do!) in fairness, compare them directly.





Brian Mikiten wrote:

> 
> Jerry -
> 
>   No problem. I think my point should have been directed more towards the fact that I had problems "warming up" <G> to piezo than anything else because of the issue of print tone. When I hold a piezo print next to one of my Oriental/Selenium toned prints, it is different - not necessarily bad but different. I have a print of a worker's glove stuck in a puddle of tar that in a silver print is stunning. As a Piezo print on several types of paper it has serious problems. On the otherhand, one of my more popular prints of a church here in Texas is actually quite nice on Piezo. Again, I equate much of what I see in Piezo to be more like a platinum print than a straight silver print because of the black/white issue.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Brian
> 
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Jerry Olson
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:47 AM
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers
> 
>   We'll just have to agree to disagree, Brian. I also used to teach
>   photography a long time ago (University of North Dakota). I feel my
>   Brooks training was a great help. I love the F64 look, and the Ansel
>   Adams print look. I don't like platinum prints at all. (At least all the
>   ones I have seen} were gray/brown and muddy as hell. Very
>   unsatisfactory, to me. I don't care how great the mid tones are, without
>   a deep black, I just don't like the print. Now high key prints are a
>   different story. I totally agree they don't have to have a deep black. I
>   just cannot imagine one of the classic Ansel Adams images without a deep
>   black. I wouldn't even want to see one, as I know I wouldn't like it.
> 
>   Maybe I have never seen a really great platinum print. I haven't seen
>   many. But if it is anything like the ones I have seen, I wouldn't like it.
> 
>   Jerry
> 
>   Brian Mikiten wrote:
>   >
>   > Jerry -
>   >
>   >   I taught photography and large format workshops across the US for several years and have to completely disagree with the statements you make on "the proper print" having certain tonal values. (yes, I read your exceptions but I feel like making comments) Now...that said...I have to mention that I used to believe this too until I started looking at some platinum and other types of prints which were deep in mid-tones and repleat of whites and blacks. My own style is fairly Adams/Sexton/Weston (yeh, right) and Piezo printing took some time to accept but I have learned that the old school of needing a dmax and dmin is probably not reasonable as a rule. I'm getting better about judging the image and not the tones. I used to preach this to students and now have to take the advice myself. I used to get stuck on getting a dmax and dmin and noticed later that the image stunk. <G>
>   >
>   > Brian
>   >
>   >   ----- Original Message -----
>   >   From: Jerry Olson
>   >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   >   Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:23 AM
>   >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers
>   >
>   >   Harvey,
>   >
>   >   Try to imagine one of Ansel Adams prints without a proper black. Think
>   >   it would be impressive? If he just had charcoal grays where blacks
>   >   should have been, I doubt if he would have been considered a good
>   >   printer. Most (but not all) landscapes need that deep black to make a
>   >   satisfying print.  And please keep in mind I did not say ALL prints
>   >   should have a deep black.
>   >
>   >   At school, we were always taught that a proper print, except high key
>   >   prints, should have a paper white, a full range of grays, and a black,
>   >   somewhere in the print that was as deep as the paper could produce.
>   >
>   >   In fact if a print did not have these qualities, it was an automatic
>   >   reprint. I had Boris Dobro as a teacher, and he was a master printer.
>   >   World Class.
>   >
>   >   Jerry
>   >
>   >   SKID Photography wrote:
>   >   >
>   >   > I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful' image.
>   >   > To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to evoke.
>   >   >nfo/terms/
>   >
>   >   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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>   >
>   > [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/
> 
>   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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> 
> [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/

Jerry -
  
    <<<There just wasn't anything approaching a black in the print, and it looked gray and muddy.>> Gee...I thought that was the definition of a platinum print. <G>

Brian

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jerry Olson 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 1:54 PM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers


  Brian, I have only seen a half dozen or so platinum prints, and have no
  idea if they were  high quality prints or not. There just wasn't
  anything approaching a black in the print, and it looked gray and muddy.

  Jerry

  I know piezo prints and silver prints are totally different animals and
  we shouldn't, (but we do!) in fairness, compare them directly.





  Brian Mikiten wrote:
  > 
  > Jerry -
  > 
  >   No problem. I think my point should have been directed more towards the fact that I had problems "warming up" <G> to piezo than anything else because of the issue of print tone. When I hold a piezo print next to one of my Oriental/Selenium toned prints, it is different - not necessarily bad but different. I have a print of a worker's glove stuck in a puddle of tar that in a silver print is stunning. As a Piezo print on several types of paper it has serious problems. On the otherhand, one of my more popular prints of a church here in Texas is actually quite nice on Piezo. Again, I equate much of what I see in Piezo to be more like a platinum print than a straight silver print because of the black/white issue.
  > 
  > Thanks!
  > 
  > Brian
  > 
  >   ----- Original Message -----
  >   From: Jerry Olson
  >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  >   Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:47 AM
  >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers
  > 
  >   We'll just have to agree to disagree, Brian. I also used to teach
  >   photography a long time ago (University of North Dakota). I feel my
  >   Brooks training was a great help. I love the F64 look, and the Ansel
  >   Adams print look. I don't like platinum prints at all. (At least all the
  >   ones I have seen} were gray/brown and muddy as hell. Very
  >   unsatisfactory, to me. I don't care how great the mid tones are, without
  >   a deep black, I just don't like the print. Now high key prints are a
  >   different story. I totally agree they don't have to have a deep black. I
  >   just cannot imagine one of the classic Ansel Adams images without a deep
  >   black. I wouldn't even want to see one, as I know I wouldn't like it.
  > 
  >   Maybe I have never seen a really great platinum print. I haven't seen
  >   many. But if it is anything like the ones I have seen, I wouldn't like it.
  > 
  >   Jerry
  > 
  >   Brian Mikiten wrote:
  >   >
  >   > Jerry -
  >   >
  >   >   I taught photography and large format workshops across the US for several years and have to completely disagree with the statements you make on "the proper print" having certain tonal values. (yes, I read your exceptions but I feel like making comments) Now...that said...I have to mention that I used to believe this too until I started looking at some platinum and other types of prints which were deep in mid-tones and repleat of whites and blacks. My own style is fairly Adams/Sexton/Weston (yeh, right) and Piezo printing took some time to accept but I have learned that the old school of needing a dmax and dmin is probably not reasonable as a rule. I'm getting better about judging the image and not the tones. I used to preach this to students and now have to take the advice myself. I used to get stuck on getting a dmax and dmin and noticed later that the image stunk. <G>
  >   >
  >   > Brian
  >   >
  >   >   ----- Original Message -----
  >   >   From: Jerry Olson
  >   >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  >   >   Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 10:23 AM
  >   >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Technically Perfect Print was: Uncoated Papers
  >   >
  >   >   Harvey,
  >   >
  >   >   Try to imagine one of Ansel Adams prints without a proper black. Think
  >   >   it would be impressive? If he just had charcoal grays where blacks
  >   >   should have been, I doubt if he would have been considered a good
  >   >   printer. Most (but not all) landscapes need that deep black to make a
  >   >   satisfying print.  And please keep in mind I did not say ALL prints
  >   >   should have a deep black.
  >   >
  >   >   At school, we were always taught that a proper print, except high key
  >   >   prints, should have a paper white, a full range of grays, and a black,
  >   >   somewhere in the print that was as deep as the paper could produce.
  >   >
  >   >   In fact if a print did not have these qualities, it was an automatic
  >   >   reprint. I had Boris Dobro as a teacher, and he was a master printer.
  >   >   World Class.
  >   >
  >   >   Jerry
  >   >
  >   >   SKID Photography wrote:
  >   >   >
  >   >   > I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful' image.
  >   >   > To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to evoke.
  >   >   >nfo/terms/
  >   >
  >   >   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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  >   >
  >   > [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/
  > 
  >   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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  > 
  > [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/

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
                 
       
       

  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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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

Dear Jerry,
In response, the first thing I can think of saying is that not every piece of music needs to be played by an
entire orchestra...A string quartet or even a single flute can make beautiful music....And that music *cannot*
be duplicated by the big, full, orchestra.  I would say the same thing is true of photographic prints, whether
they be landscape, nude, portrait, still life, etc.

You use Ansel Adams as an example that absolutely proves your theory, but I don't think you are familiar with
*all* of Ansel's work.  There are images in his oeuvre that don't display that full tonal range (and not just
'high key' ones) which are still beautiful.  Further, the prints that he did mid-career are considered better
(by the market forces and art historians) than his later work that was *much* more luminously rendered, how
can that be?.

I think, if Ansel was alive today, he would be the first to say that he was known for *not* setting
limits.....Are you familiar with the time he sent Imogen Cunningham a photo printed on a coffee can (and she
sent it back to him with a pot plant planted in it)?  The point being that there are several ways to approach
photography, and we shouldn't be boxed in by just one possible interpretation.

Your insistence of requiring a full tonal range in every image (except high key, of course) reminds me of the
time I was on a selection committee of a gallery, and one of my fellow judges declared that all window mats
had to be rectilinear, and that an entrant (which was a beautiful collage of several 'sectioned' photos) had
to be disqualified because the photographer had gone through the trouble of making the window in his mat
'conform' to all the print edges!  Sheer nonsense.  Who made up that rule?  Not Ansel Adams!

In nature, not every scene has a full range of tones...Is conveying those scenes off limits to photography?

While I agree, it is very important to be *able* to produce a full tonal range on a photo print, it just isn't
*always* necessary.  When I had my apprentices in my old studio in upstate NY, I had my 'kids' print for a
black, and then a white in every print that I assigned them.  But after they 'got it', it was time to let them
be free....The full tonal range assignments were an *excercise*, not an end unto itself.

If you carried your theories through to other art mediums, you would exclude most modern art....Does that make
sense?

For the record:  I am considered a master b&w printer myself, and have (among other things) had my work in
several respected gallery shows (worldwide), been published in several hardcover 'Art' books, and have
lectured about my work at the International Center for Photography, here in NYC.

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC

PS:  With all the references to 'flat' or 'grey' platinum prints, I would suggest that you look at the
platinum work of Irving Penn (very contrasty, with *intense* blacks, or the nudes of Rod Cook (I just went to
his website...and I don't know as the full tonal range is captured on the website, but in person, they have it
all!
http://www.rodcook.com/

Jerry Olson wrote:

> Harvey,
>
> Try to imagine one of Ansel Adams prints without a proper black. Think
> it would be impressive? If he just had charcoal grays where blacks
> should have been, I doubt if he would have been considered a good
> printer. Most (but not all) landscapes need that deep black to make a
> satisfying print.  And please keep in mind I did not say ALL prints
> should have a deep black.
>
> At school, we were always taught that a proper print, except high key
> prints, should have a paper white, a full range of grays, and a black,
> somewhere in the print that was as deep as the paper could produce.
>
> In fact if a print did not have these qualities, it was an automatic
> reprint. I had Boris Dobro as a teacher, and he was a master printer.
> World Class.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> SKID Photography wrote:
> >
> > I think it's unfortunate that you seem to have such a limited view of what can comprise a 'beautiful'
> image.
> > To be hemmed in by perfect black and pure white seems so limiting, when there are ranges of emotions to
> evoke.
> >nfo/terms/
>
> 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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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

Further, the prints that he did mid-career are considered better
> (by the market forces and art historians) than his later work that was *much* more luminously rendered, how
> can that be?.

I have no idea. I much prefer the look of the later prints!


> In nature, not every scene has a full range of tones...Is conveying those scenes off limits to photography?

All I know is I just don't accept a gray landscape with weak blacks,
except for the high key images. 

I can't rule out all prints of course! I haven't seen them. But if there
is a large area of deep black in a print, that has no shadow detail, as
many of my prints have, they would look terrible if the deepest black
was only a charcoal gray. I have thrown out many a print because of that.


> While I agree, it is very important to be *able* to produce a full tonal range on a photo print, it just isn't
> *always* necessary.  

Didn't say it was. I'm referring to Landscape type prints, remember! 

At Brooks Institute, even in the later units, we had to have solid
blacks in our prints. And I must say, that I've never seen better prints
than are always on exhibition in the Brooks Galleries. 

Back then, we had Varigam and Velour Black Photographic papers. They had
incredible blacks, and the paper was brilliant white. 

  But after they 'got it', it was time to let them
> be free....The full tonal range assignments were an *excercise*, not an end unto itself.

Again, would you like to see the classic Ansel prints that had only a
charcoal gray for a black? Really?

Remember I'm talking about a specific type of print here. 


> If you carried your theories through to other art mediums, you would exclude most modern art....Does that make
> sense?

Excluding most modern art makes GREAT sense. There's relatively little
that impresses me. Again, Some of it is great. But the vast majority is
really awful.

And I'm the first to admit I haven't seen many platinum prints! I always
understood you could not get an intense black with the platinum process.

Jerry

Jerry,

>>[T]he prints that [Adams] did mid-career are considered better
>> (by the market forces and art historians) than his later
>>work that was *much* more luminously rendered, how can that be?.

>...

>Again, would you like to see the classic Ansel prints that had only a
>charcoal gray for a black? ...

Have you ever seen the early "Moonrise, Hernandez?"  At first AA printed it
fairly straight -- complete with dull gray sky.   Maybe those early Moonrise
prints have some collectible value now, but if so, it is only because AA
later printed it with more contrast and a nice black sky. It is these later
versions of Moonrise that, in my view, made AA a household name.

Of course, I too am into landscapes.

I look at composition on two scales -- "macro patterns" and "micro
patterns."  We just don't "see" things unless they catch out attention.  In
color, we are hard-wired to respond to red, and other bright colors to a
lesser degree.  In B&W, we don't have the ability to add red to get the
viewer's attention. (And most of us landscape types don't throw in a
beautiful nude woman to get the men's attention.)  So, what I've found works
best is a high-contrast, fairly large pattern.  I call this the "macro
pattern."  It's goal is to get the viewer to notice the print from across
the room and cause the person to come over and take a closer look.  Then, of
course, the rest of the composition (it's "micro patterns") most hold the
viewer's interest for as long as possible.

Back to uncoated paper, I'll throw some Somerset Velvet in the fader at some
point to see how much less -- if at all -- it warm shifts.  I might add for
the Piezo folks, my Piezo on SV is actually slightly greener than it is on
EAM.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., SKID Photography <skid@b...> wrote:
snip...
> For the record:  I am considered a master b&w printer myself, and have (among other things) had my work in
> several respected gallery shows (worldwide), been published in several hardcover 'Art' books, and have
> lectured about my work at the International Center for Photography, here in NYC.

Harvey, first of all I was glad to see on another list that you and yours are ok.
Given you experience, I'm curious about your impressions on the state of digital B&W printing, what current methods you 
use, and how the prints feel to you compared to analogue methods.
If you have time of course.
Thanks, Tyler

Paul, In 1966, I could have bought a 16x20 print of "Moonrise" for $200.
Ansel had an exhibit in Santa Barbara when I was just beginning my
Brooks Studies. Photography as an "Art Form" wasn't yet established. At
the time, I would have loved to have bought it, but it would have been
equivalent to about $4000 today, and I was one of the REALLY poor Brooks
Students, (I was there on the GI Bill), so that was totally out of the
question! But I do remember it, and it did not have the black sky of the
more recent versions.  Of course I didn't know that then, because I had
never seen that print with the black sky. I just loved Ansels work, and
all of the F64 Group. I love the black sky of later versions. It MAKES
the print!!! Others may disagree, but I know what I like!

Also, it of course makes for a MUCH more dramatic image! If you just
print it like a commercial print, it doesn't have enough punch to carry
the image as fine art.


Jerry 

I could like somerset velvet if you could get a nicer black on it, and
if it were just a tad whiter. It has a very nice texture. 

I still love the torchon blacks, but not the texture!

Eclipse looks pretty nice to me. Photo Matte, too. Epson Archival and
Torchon are still the black champions though.

Jerry Olson wrote:
<snip> If you just

> print it like a commercial print, it doesn't have enough punch to carry
> the image as fine art.

Jerry,
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here....Are you saying that Art prints need to have 'punch'
to be considered Art?  If so, that will come as quite a surprise to a lot of curators and collectors.  ;- )

And....What did that make Ansel's stuff in the 1960's, or what about that sloth, Edward Weston?  ;- )

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC


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

> >>[T]he prints that [Adams] did mid-career are considered better
> >> (by the market forces and art historians) than his later
> >>work that was *much* more luminously rendered, how can that be?.
>
> >...
>
> >Again, would you like to see the classic Ansel prints that had only a
> >charcoal gray for a black? ...
>
> Have you ever seen the early "Moonrise, Hernandez?"  At first AA printed it
> fairly straight -- complete with dull gray sky.   Maybe those early Moonrise
> prints have some collectible value now, but if so, it is only because AA
> later printed it with more contrast and a nice black sky. It is these later
> versions of Moonrise that, in my view, made AA a household name.
>
> Of course, I too am into landscapes.
>
> I look at composition on two scales -- "macro patterns" and "micro
> patterns."  We just don't "see" things unless they catch out attention.  In
> color, we are hard-wired to respond to red, and other bright colors to a
> lesser degree.  In B&W, we don't have the ability to add red to get the
> viewer's attention. (And most of us landscape types don't throw in a
> beautiful nude woman to get the men's attention.)  So, what I've found works
> best is a high-contrast, fairly large pattern.  I call this the "macro
> pattern."  It's goal is to get the viewer to notice the print from across
> the room and cause the person to come over and take a closer look.  Then, of
> course, the rest of the composition (it's "micro patterns") most hold the
> viewer's interest for as long as possible.

Have you considered the work of Paul Caponigro (not his son, John Paul Caponigro).  He is unquestionably
recognized as one of the modern masters of B&W landscape photography.  While his work might be considered more
'spiritual' than 'operatic' (Ansel), he does just incredible work, and his prints look good enough to eat.
They, many times, don't have that enormous 'pop' of tones that you describe above.  Not all of his images do
*scream* at you across a room, but I will always be drawn to them.

I never considered that the job of an image was to make you cross a room for a closer look (that sounds more
like the attraction of looking at an accident).  It was my understanding that if you made the image big enough
to see (across a room), and if it was a good image, one would be drawn to it and more would be revealed as you
got closer.  Using 'contrast', to sucker people in, limits the scope of information that can be communicated.
It would seem a shame to *only* have these kinds of images....It's a big world out there.

I guess what I'm try to express, and what surprises me, is the lack of acceptance of other kinds of imagery.
Yes, we all have limits, but why set them so short?

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., SKID Photography <skid@b...> wrote:
snip
> Have you considered the work of Paul Caponigro (not his son, John Paul Caponigro).  He is unquestionably
> recognized as one of the modern masters...

Oh man! Don't get me started. Harvey, I'm right with you there. I'm not a collector, but one of my prized possesions is a  
Caponigro, one of the Stonehenge images. It has no white, no black, I've never been able to make a print as luminous. It 
definitely doesn't yell at you, sometimes you see it and, other times not. One day it'll practically bring me to my knees, the 
next day I'll wonder what was wrong with me. There is no way to take art like that for granted, it's always new.
Adams was an imense figure in the developement of the craft. He showed how far it could be taken, was extremely 
generous with his knowledge, and made some glorious art. But once that was absorbed by many artists, including those in 
the west coast school, they took that knowledge and explored all the possibilities of tonal expression, but maintaining the 
high level of craft Adams set for everyone. This is not new, many of these people were working back in the 50's, and many 
are/were landscape photographers. Printmaking has come a long way since Adams, at least for me.
I'm not going to enter the arguement with Jerry, I learned a long time ago...
Your post got me going though. Bringing monochromatic images alive on paper remains fascinationg to me, following the 
rules I have in my head can totally screw me up. Why is one gray image dead, and another glowing?
Doing it with ink is a new challenge, definitely.
Tyler

Tyler.
Thanks for letting me know that I'm not crazy....It's good to know that I'm not the only one.

Now if I can only rein in my ego, and not rise to the 'bait'.  ;- )

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC

Tyler Boley wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., SKID Photography <skid@b...> wrote:
> snip
> > Have you considered the work of Paul Caponigro (not his son, John Paul Caponigro).  He is unquestionably
> > recognized as one of the modern masters...
>
> Oh man! Don't get me started. Harvey, I'm right with you there. I'm not a collector, but one of my prized
> possesions is a
> Caponigro, one of the Stonehenge images. It has no white, no black, I've never been able to make a print as
> luminous. It
> definitely doesn't yell at you, sometimes you see it and, other times not. One day it'll practically bring
> me to my knees, the
> next day I'll wonder what was wrong with me. There is no way to take art like that for granted, it's always
> new.
> Adams was an imense figure in the developement of the craft. He showed how far it could be taken, was
> extremely
> generous with his knowledge, and made some glorious art. But once that was absorbed by many artists,
> including those in
> the west coast school, they took that knowledge and explored all the possibilities of tonal expression, but
> maintaining the
> high level of craft Adams set for everyone. This is not new, many of these people were working back in the
> 50's, and many
> are/were landscape photographers. Printmaking has come a long way since Adams, at least for me.
> I'm not going to enter the arguement with Jerry, I learned a long time ago...
> Your post got me going though. Bringing monochromatic images alive on paper remains fascinationg to me,
> following the
> rules I have in my head can totally screw me up. Why is one gray image dead, and another glowing?
> Doing it with ink is a new challenge, definitely.
> Tyler


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

Harvey F. wrote:

...
>Have you considered the work of Paul Caponigro ...

Definitely.  Although I'm not lucky enough to own one of his originals, it
was a good excuse to pull his "Masterworks From Forty Years" off the shelf
and browse through it again.  Beautiful, full-tone prints.  I can't imagine
how Running White Deer would look without the deep tones and great contrast
between the shadowy forest and white deer.

For that matter, I think the shots I found on the web of yours have great
impact.  Very good stuff indeed.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

Paul Roark wrote:

> Harvey F. wrote:
> ...
> >Have you considered the work of Paul Caponigro ...
>
> Definitely.  Although I'm not lucky enough to own one of his originals, it
> was a good excuse to pull his "Masterworks From Forty Years" off the shelf
> and browse through it again.  Beautiful, full-tone prints.  I can't imagine
> how Running White Deer would look without the deep tones and great contrast
> between the shadowy forest and white deer.

It's funny that you should mention that image (the deer).  There was a time that Paul thought of the Running
White Deer image as only worthy of a christmas card, and nothing more. (an aside)

Now to the point:  Yes, that image has deep tones and great contrast...I never said that prints shouldn't.
And certainly images that are not full tone absolutely need good contrast.  I just think that not all images
need a drop dead black or a paper base white, that's all.  No more, no less.  Many of Paul's images that don't
contain the aforementioned are very technically proficient, and *have* contrast that visually adds up to print
brilliance, or luminescence.

I was talking to my partner about this thread tonight.  And another thought that I had was that the Ansel
Moonrise image has the intensity of a sweet dessert, but that  life is not just made up of desserts.  There is
(and needs to be ) a balance in both food and imagery.  If you look at Ansel's life's work, they balance out
his vision...And I think that he would have been the first one ot say that....He didn't *just* shoot images
that looked like that.  And to him to just tha timage does him a disservice.

Oh, and before this goes any further, I want to go on record as saying that I like a full toned image as much
as the next guy.  I also think that when you want a good black in an image, it *should* be there.

> For that matter, I think the shots I found on the web of yours have great
> impact.  Very good stuff indeed.

<blush> Why thank you, your imagery is no too shady either.  :- ).

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC


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

Harvey, 

I don't want to argue this, really. I know exactly what I like and what
I do not like. I do not like gray prints. I like prints that have deep
blacks. I much prefer Ansels later prints. I like the dramatic black sky
look.  Always have, always will.

Jerry

> I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here....Are you saying that Art prints need to have 'punch'
> to be considered Art?  If so, that will come as quite a surprise to a lot of curators and collectors.  ;- )

Just telling you what I personally like and don't like.
 
> And....What did that make Ansel's stuff in the 1960's, or what about that sloth, Edward Weston?  ;- )

I've only seen a few original Weston prints and they were beautiful.

Jerry
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> 
wrote:
> > Have you considered the work of Paul Caponigro (not his 
son, John Paul Caponigro).  He is unquestionably
> > recognized as one of the modern masters...


Caponigro story: I was shooting an annual report near Santa Fe 
many years ago. I built in an extra day after the job to try to seek 
him out. I called ahead, he gave directions, and me and my 
assistant hit the road.

The driveway was a dirt road that lead up a hill. On this hill stood 
two small buildings; one, his home, and the other, his darkroom. 
As we got out of the car, all we heard was the silence of the 
desert. But then, some classical piano coming out of the main 
building. As we got to the house, the front door was open; we 
shyly poked our necks into the foyer and there he is, sunlight 
streaming in the window, playing the piano. He had a cigarette in 
his mouth, and the ash was about as long as the whole 
cigarette. He didn't hear us come up, and he just kept playing. 
And we were too chicken to knock and bring him out of his spell. 
When we walked in the entryway, just about four feet 
inside the front door, was a giant empty "bowl" of some type, like 
a hot tub; submerged in the floor. He sat with us, looked at our 
images, and offered us coffee. (He kept HaggenDasz vanilla ice 
cream in his freezer for coffee-cream; I guess he rarely went to 
town for fresh milk, so this was his solution). Then he walked us 
down the hill to his darkroom. Beautiful, organized, prints in filed 
boxes along the walls.

I will never forget that as long as I live. That hot tub thing, and 
those cigarette ashes lit by the sun, and the sound of the piano 
coming out of the house.

-MTucker

Of course this is my opinion...but it shouldn't be forgotten that 
tones in a print help to define the overall expression the person is 
trying to communicate. Whether it be black, white, or gray.

Someone mentioned Ansel Adams, Moonrise over Hernandez. I don't know 
what was in the photographer's mind or heart when he shot that. It 
was 1941...war all around. Also, it shouldn't be forgotten that one 
of the primary elements of that image was a cemetary with white 
crosses, not just the moon. In fact, he only got one 8X10 negative 
exposed. When he turned over the film holder for a second shot, he 
said, "but as I pulled out the slide the sunlight left the crosses 
and the magical moment was gone forever." What was AA trying 
to 'show' in that picture...?

Tho black and white imagery is a deeper abstraction of life (than a 
color photograph), it still is related to feeling in life. In life 
there is little total blackness, or whiteness. Life is mostly filled 
with shades of gray, from all scientific, spiritual, philosophical 
perspectives. Total blackness in life...maybe is only saved for 
death. I don't know where total whiteness is...maybe birth.

To forget that shades of the tonal scale emulates feeling, leaves a 
great source of expression out of the picture. It is why black & 
white work can sometimes better express feeling than color. If the 
tone doesn't belong with the expression, then it is a dramatic 
affectation, a lie that betrays the sanctity of art and clear 
communication. 

ken

http://www.kensmithart.com


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson 
<jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> Harvey, 
> 
> I don't want to argue this, really. I know exactly what I like and 
what
> I do not like. I do not like gray prints. I like prints that have 
deep
> blacks. I much prefer Ansels later prints. I like the dramatic 
black sky

> look.  Always have, always will.
> 
> Jerry
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., ken@k... wrote:
> 
> 
> Someone mentioned Ansel Adams, Moonrise over Hernandez. > 
> 
Woops! The correct title was: Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico, 1941. 

ken

http://www.kensmithart.com

A beautiful story, thank you.
 
ken

http://www.kensmithart.com



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Mark Tucker" <mark@m...> 
wrote:

> Caponigro story: I was shooting an annual report near Santa Fe 
> many years ago. I built in an extra day after the job to try to 
seek 
> him out. I called ahead, he gave directions, and me and my 
> assistant hit the road.
...<snip>...

> I will never forget that as long as I live. That hot tub thing, and 
> those cigarette ashes lit by the sun, and the sound of the piano 
> coming out of the house.
> 
> -MTucker

Harvey,

We had a Paul Camponigro exhibit last year at the Palm Beach Photographic Center.  I was having lunch with Ross Whitaker (NY PHotog) and we stopped by to see his prints. Ross and I were drooling over one of his images that has stacks of hay in a field. The detail, tones, and luminosity were extraordinary. I just could not believe that this was a silver print. Truly impressive. 

Regards,

Michael J. Kravit, AIA
Architect/Photographer
www.kravit.net/photography


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