Re: [Digital BW] Re: A Call for Standards (Permanence/Stability)/ the Real World
2001-10-14 by JackG
Hi Steadman, Yes, he felt color would not last and refused to offer it. Let me mention one more thing about prints going bad. About five to seven years ago I decided to close my darkroom and contract out what little B&W I was doing to my color/B&W lab for printing and finishing. This decision was made because I was not doing as much commercial work as in the past and B&W portraits were becoming popular again. Most of the portraits I offer are traditionally retouched on the negative and then what can't be completed there is positively done on the print. It was not practical for me to continue having the lab retouch the neg, return it to me for printing and then send it back to them for positive retouching, texture, mounting and protective "SPRAY". I know there must have been some exceptions, but most of the B&W prints they made for me went bad within one to two years. I have never had to replace so many prints in all 35 plus years of business. Not only was it embarrassing, it certainly had some financial ramifications. Every municipal judge that I photographed over the past 5 to seven years had to be replaced. I do not know why they kept using me when I had to reprint everything at least twice. This business was started in 1945, we have B&W portraits and candid wedding prints that have been out there for a long, long time. What caused this problem? You will not like the answer, NO ONE KNOWS! Everyone blamed each other, Kodak said it was the labs fault, the lab said it was the spray, etc. What were we doing differently now that we had not done in the past, extensive retouching and then SPRAYING it! My guess was the spray caused the problem, I am now paying for expensive laminates to hide the retouching, which alters the true look of B&W. The best answer I came up with before that was to have the retouching done digitally and then create a new neg that you did not need to spray to hide the retouching. Then the lab stopped offering that service because of the unreliable equipment. I am now in the process of having a 16 x 20 color portrait of a child restored. I would guess it is about 10 years old. I gave an estimate of approximately $500. That is probably more than she paid for the original, but I doubt if I will make much money on it. The original studio that produced the portrait is no longer in business. They were a fine studio that had been in business for over 50 years. Now a philosophical question, if all the work you did 10 years went bad due to no fault of your own, should you replace it for free or at least at material cost? The above example is going to cost a lot because I did not have the original neg. and we are having to do it digitally. As we all know computer time is expensive. Want another can of worms, how long should you store negs or data disks to replace prints???? I can guarantee you this, you do not store negs to make money on reprints at a much later date. Regards, John In Okc snip : John, : Thanks for posting. : : But I missed your point about the guy with high standards and why his client (wealthy) left him. Is it because they wanted color and he did not provide color? : : Steadman : ----- Original Message ----- : <snip>: There was a photographer in this city, who with his wife produced some of : the best B & W and oil tinted B & W prints that I have ever seen. He felt : that he was doing his clients a disservice to offer a medium that was not up : to his standards. His clients were the more wealthy in this town, they : deserted him and he went BROKE! <big snip>