Digital BW, The Print

>Brandt's images should be especially >exciting, rather than
>merely "precious," when seen in grand >scale and with the extra
>control that's so readily available with >inkjet printing...

I know nothing about this particular exhibit but based only on the quotes 
you've provided here it doesn't look like these are ink jet prints, it looks 
like they're traditional carbon prints made by coating a tissue with 
ammonium or potassium dichromate, exposing the tissue, then contact printing 
the tissue onto a gelatin coated transfer paper. If you enjoy a good fight 
just tell someone who uses this process that you're making carbon prints on 
your ink jet printer. : - )

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Djon" <westsidemaurice@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 9:30 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Bill Brandt "carbon prints" Los Angeles


www.billbrandt.com/News/Current%20Exhibitions/Press%
20release/pressreleasefkg.html

I'm driving down to Los Angeles from Monterey to see this important
Bill Brandt exhibit...the press release I've cited here is overblown,
but Brandt's work certainly is well known to anybody who's taken a
serious interest in B&W photography outside the confines of scenics.

 Brandt's images should be especially exciting, rather than
merely "precious," when seen in grand scale and with the extra
control that's so readily available with inkjet printing..."carbon"
printing as the gallery labels it in the Los Angeles Times.

"He excelled in all fields - social, Surrealism, night photography,
documentary, landscape, portraiture and the nude."

"Brandt's nudes are also considered as his most innovative work. "In
photography only Edward Weston has made nudes of equal power," said
John Szarkowski, Director Emeritus of MoMA's Department of
Photography. Dramatic use of the contrasting values of black and
white, and exploration of optical deformations, cause the nudes to
read as daring studies in abstractions, somewhat reminiscent of Henry
Moore's sculptures.

"Carbon was one of the earliest substances used to produce
photographic prints. The first known image-forming use of carbon
pigment was in the Paleolithic Chauvet-Pont-d'Arc cave in France some
30,000 years ago. More recently, the first photographic Carbon Print
process was developed by Adolphe Poitevin in France in 1856."

"An important aspect of the process is that it is an ink on paper
medium, not a light-sensitive emulsion, and therefore is more akin to
gravure than to silver or platinum prints. Carbon printing is still
practised today in various forms by those who revere a more permanent
image."





Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and 
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU 
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY 
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, 
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE 
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY 
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR 
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY 
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

These are 35X40" according to the LA Times review (Friday July 15). 

Probably not carbon contact prints! 

Brandt's modern, graphic, strong: new renditions of his images require 
techniques that convey his vision strongly and honestly, not with 
pictorialist artifice ("traditional carbon printing")  

That damn gallery BETTER be showing honest carbon inkjets: Brandt, of 
all photographers, would want that! 

...guess I'll call in advance to confirm inkjet (I'd be diverting to 
Los Angeles before returning home from Monterey Peninsula more 
directly to New Mexico). OTOH I've got a lot of film with me, and LA's 
seething with images... :-)

Djon
  
"Brian Ellis" <bellis60@v...> wrote:
> >Brandt's images should be especially >exciting, rather than
> >merely "precious," when seen in grand >scale and with the extra
> >control that's so readily available with >inkjet printing...
> 
> I know nothing about this particular exhibit but based only on the 
quotes 
> you've provided here it doesn't look like these are ink jet prints, 
it looks 
> like they're traditional carbon prints made by coating a tissue with 
> ammonium or potassium dichromate, exposing the tissue, then contact 
printing 
> the tissue onto a gelatin coated transfer paper.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Djon"
<westsidemaurice@y...> wrote:
...
> That damn gallery BETTER be showing honest carbon inkjets: Brandt, of 
> all photographers, would want that! 


"An important aspect of the process is that it is an ink on paper
medium,..."

that would imply inkjet

"... not a light-sensitive emulsion, and therefore is more akin to
gravure than to silver or platinum prints. Carbon printing is still
practised today in various forms by those who revere a more permanent
image."

That would imply carbro

mixed message

Tyler

>These are 35X40" according to the LA >Times review (Friday July 15).
>Probably not carbon contact prints!

I agree. The quote in your original message didn't say anything about their 
size. It would be interesting though to know exactly how they were made.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Djon" <westsidemaurice@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 11:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Bill Brandt "carbon prints" Los Angeles


These are 35X40" according to the LA Times review (Friday July 15).

Probably not carbon contact prints!

Brandt's modern, graphic, strong: new renditions of his images require
techniques that convey his vision strongly and honestly, not with
pictorialist artifice ("traditional carbon printing")

That damn gallery BETTER be showing honest carbon inkjets: Brandt, of
all photographers, would want that!

...guess I'll call in advance to confirm inkjet (I'd be diverting to
Los Angeles before returning home from Monterey Peninsula more
directly to New Mexico). OTOH I've got a lot of film with me, and LA's
seething with images... :-)

Djon

"Brian Ellis" <bellis60@v...> wrote:
> >Brandt's images should be especially >exciting, rather than
> >merely "precious," when seen in grand >scale and with the extra
> >control that's so readily available with >inkjet printing...
>
> I know nothing about this particular exhibit but based only on the
quotes
> you've provided here it doesn't look like these are ink jet prints,
it looks
> like they're traditional carbon prints made by coating a tissue with
> ammonium or potassium dichromate, exposing the tissue, then contact
printing
> the tissue onto a gelatin coated transfer paper.




Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and 
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU 
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY 
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, 
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE 
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY 
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR 
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY 
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

Someone should email that journalist and find out how they were done? I am very curious. 
The Brandt estate backed by a big gallery could afford the gelatin transfer process. This is 
the only place I am aware of that does them. But they don't list anything over 20x24. That 
certainly doesn't mean they wouln't do special projects and probably do. This is the same 
company that did the color carbon work for the photographer Jock Sturges that were sold 
for a lot of cash. I assume that if you could afford it they could produce them quite large.   

  http://www.atxstudio.com/pricing_guide.html    


John






--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Ellis" <bellis60@v...> 
wrote:
> >These are 35X40" according to the LA >Times review (Friday July 15).
> >Probably not carbon contact prints!
> 
> I agree. The quote in your original message didn't say anything about their 
> size. It would be interesting though to know exactly how they were made.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Djon" <westsidemaurice@y...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 11:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Bill Brandt "carbon prints" Los Angeles
> 
> 
> These are 35X40" according to the LA Times review (Friday July 15).
> 
> Probably not carbon contact prints!
> 
> Brandt's modern, graphic, strong: new renditions of his images require
> techniques that convey his vision strongly and honestly, not with
> pictorialist artifice ("traditional carbon printing")
> 
> That damn gallery BETTER be showing honest carbon inkjets: Brandt, of
> all photographers, would want that!
> 
> ...guess I'll call in advance to confirm inkjet (I'd be diverting to
> Los Angeles before returning home from Monterey Peninsula more
> directly to New Mexico). OTOH I've got a lot of film with me, and LA's
> seething with images... :-)
> 
> Djon
> 
> "Brian Ellis" <bellis60@v...> wrote:
> > >Brandt's images should be especially >exciting, rather than
> > >merely "precious," when seen in grand >scale and with the extra
> > >control that's so readily available with >inkjet printing...
> >
> > I know nothing about this particular exhibit but based only on the
> quotes
> > you've provided here it doesn't look like these are ink jet prints,
> it looks
> > like they're traditional carbon prints made by coating a tissue with
> > ammonium or potassium dichromate, exposing the tissue, then contact
> printing
> > the tissue onto a gelatin coated transfer paper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
> they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and 
> Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO 
YOU 
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY 
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, 
> GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND 
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE 
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY 
> TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR 
> ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF 
ANY 

> THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links

John, last I heard Ataraxia was no longer doing these due to lack of
materials. To my knowledge Tod Gangler here in Seattle is the only one
left in the country doing them, and he has to make his own materials.
I don't know if he printed the Brandt show but I could find out. He
did print some color for Sturges as well when Ataraxis stopped, but
they were 9600 UC prints. Tod is an amazing printer. Sturges has since
taken everything "in house", UC all the way at least for color.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> Someone should email that journalist and find out how they were
done? I am very curious. 
> The Brandt estate backed by a big gallery could afford the gelatin
transfer process. This is 
> the only place I am aware of that does them. But they don't list
anything over 20x24. That 
> certainly doesn't mean they wouln't do special projects and probably
do. This is the same 
> company that did the color carbon work for the photographer Jock
Sturges that were sold 
> for a lot of cash. I assume that if you could afford it they could
produce them quite large.   
> 
>   http://www.atxstudio.com/pricing_guide.html    
> 
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Ellis"
<bellis60@v...> 
> wrote:
> > >These are 35X40" according to the LA >Times review (Friday July 15).
> > >Probably not carbon contact prints!
> > 
> > I agree. The quote in your original message didn't say anything
about their 
> > size. It would be interesting though to know exactly how they were
made.
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Djon" <westsidemaurice@y...>
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 11:06 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Bill Brandt "carbon prints" Los Angeles
> > 
> > 
> > These are 35X40" according to the LA Times review (Friday July 15).
> > 
> > Probably not carbon contact prints!
> > 
> > Brandt's modern, graphic, strong: new renditions of his images require
> > techniques that convey his vision strongly and honestly, not with
> > pictorialist artifice ("traditional carbon printing")
> > 
> > That damn gallery BETTER be showing honest carbon inkjets: Brandt, of
> > all photographers, would want that!
> > 
> > ...guess I'll call in advance to confirm inkjet (I'd be diverting to
> > Los Angeles before returning home from Monterey Peninsula more
> > directly to New Mexico). OTOH I've got a lot of film with me, and LA's
> > seething with images... :-)
> > 
> > Djon
> > 
> > "Brian Ellis" <bellis60@v...> wrote:
> > > >Brandt's images should be especially >exciting, rather than
> > > >merely "precious," when seen in grand >scale and with the extra
> > > >control that's so readily available with >inkjet printing...
> > >
> > > I know nothing about this particular exhibit but based only on the
> > quotes
> > > you've provided here it doesn't look like these are ink jet prints,
> > it looks
> > > like they're traditional carbon prints made by coating a tissue with
> > > ammonium or potassium dichromate, exposing the tissue, then contact
> > printing
> > > the tissue onto a gelatin coated transfer paper.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
resources as 
> > they are often being updated.
> > 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> > 
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
wish to 
> > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
this same 
> > page.
> > 
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages
to keep 
> > them short.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
flames. 
> > Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
> > membership without notice.
> > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of
digital B&W 
> > printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be
removed from 
> > the membership.
> > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> > guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group
Owner and 
> > Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files
section:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> > 
> > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE
PRINT 
> > YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
> > "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE
LIABLE TO 
> YOU 
> > FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR
EXEMPLARY 
> > DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, 
> > GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE 
"OWNER" AND 
> > "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN
ADVISED OF THE 
> > POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE
INABILITY 
> > TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED
ACCESS TO OR 
> > ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR
CONDUCT OF 
> ANY 
> > THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY
OTHER 

> > MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links

Thanks Tyler,

That is really interesting your guy in Seattle is the only one left. Does he do a lot of high 
profile work these days? I would love to see his studio sometime.

It is strange that Ataraxia left their website up, complete with price list. Odd huh? Well 
from that post at the end here it looks like Adamson is doing Ultrachrome prints of them 
now. That's what he does. That and Iris. 

It's kind of funny to me. Our High Mueum brought David Adamson here for a lecture about 
3 years ago. He had a bunch of Iris prints that he was passing around. The color ones 
looked no better than the Epson 10K prints I was doing then and his Iris monochromes 
looked flat and dull compared to the Lyson Quads I was also doing then ( not first class by 
any standards).  He wouldn't talk about Cone, acted like he didn't exist and said he didn't 
know what Piezography was all about (strange for an industry leader). I asked him and his 
assistant if he was considering using Epson machines now that they were so permanent 
and viable. He said "oh no we will only use Iris and Mimaki" we don't care for the Epsons 
because they are impossible to keep aligned. Now when I look on his website I see a wall 
of 9600's. He's using what we are, though he is extremely wealthy from what I hear, and 
has Mimaki, Rolands, and everything else. He told us he went for years without making 
any profit at all ( that would be fun huh?). Adamson said he got to develop a nice collecton 
though. I actually don't know who does the work over there but they have a nice gallery 
space and lots of toys.

John




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

> John, last I heard Ataraxia was no longer doing these due to lack of
> materials. To my knowledge Tod Gangler here in Seattle is the only one
> left in the country doing them, and he has to make his own materials.
> I don't know if he printed the Brandt show but I could find out. He
> did print some color for Sturges as well when Ataraxis stopped, but
> they were 9600 UC prints. Tod is an amazing printer. Sturges has since
> taken everything "in house", UC all the way at least for color.
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> > Someone should email that journalist and find out how they were
> done? I am very curious. 
> > The Brandt estate backed by a big gallery could afford the gelatin
> transfer process. This is 
> > the only place I am aware of that does them. But they don't list
> anything over 20x24. That 
> > certainly doesn't mean they wouln't do special projects and probably
> do. This is the same 
> > company that did the color carbon work for the photographer Jock
> Sturges that were sold 
> > for a lot of cash. I assume that if you could afford it they could
> produce them quite large.   
> > 
> >   http://www.atxstudio.com/pricing_guide.html    
> > 
> > 
> > John

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> Thanks Tyler,
> 
> That is really interesting your guy in Seattle is the only one left.
Does he do a lot of high 
> profile work these days? I would love to see his studio sometime.

It's called Art and Soul. He keeps a pretty low profile but prints for
some very impressive people. I don't think he has a website, to this day.

> 
> It is strange that Ataraxia left their website up, complete with
price list. Odd huh?

I could be wrong, I heard it second hand. It could be that they are
not out of materials yet, but the word is no one will make them any
more. That, of course, is second hand info as well.

> Well 
> from that post at the end here it looks like Adamson is doing
Ultrachrome prints of them 
> now. That's what he does. That and Iris. 

Yup, and I noticed that wall of Epsons as well. So "Carbon" must mean
UC, I suppose that's ok if it's primarily the K inks. But it gives an
artsy marketing mystique to something you can go buy off the shelf at
Office Depot.
You know he doesn't use Cone inks <G>.

> It's kind of funny to me. Our High Mueum brought David Adamson here
for a lecture about 
> 3 years ago...

He, Mac from Nash, and Jon are all of the same generation of shops, or
very close to each other. I think there is some contention between
them about who did the most inovation and who was first and all that.
You know, at that level there is a certain cult of personality
involved. Funny. You know damn well he knew exactly what Jon was up to.

...
> assistant if he was considering using Epson machines now that they
were so permanent 
> and viable. He said "oh no we will only use Iris and Mimaki" we
don't care for the Epsons 
> because they are impossible to keep aligned. Now when I look on his
website I see a wall 
> of 9600's. He's using what we are...

well, maybe he's got his beta 9800s now as well. Epson is cultivating
people like him carefully. His shop is no doubt "Epson cerified..."
Not a certification I will win any time soon.
Tyler
www.custom-digital.com

and John, you should put your url in a post or two and be as shamelss
as I am. I think people here would enjoy seeing what you do.

John,

>At least they should give you a source credit or reference Clayton.

Good news.  I sent an email to the Fahey Klein Gallery and the Bill
Brandt Archive.  The gallery owner responded immediately saying they
agreed with me, but that the press release was written by the Bill
Brandt Archive in London and they will surely respond.  This morning I
received the following:
______________________________________________
Thanks for your email regarding the information on the Bill Brandt 
carbon print show at the Fahey Klein Gallery and associated
information on our website.

We are grateful for your site for the added information on this
printing process. We have dealt with your comments immediately by
adding a reference to your website here 
<http://www.billbrandt.com/News/Current%20Exhibiti
ons/Press%20release/pressreleasefkg.html>

and apologise for the lack of prior acknowledgement.

We do not condone any kind of copyright infringement and send our 
sincere apologies for any misunderstanding.

kind regards,

John-Paul Kernot
Director

Bill Brandt Archive Ltd
4 Airlie Gardens
London W87AJ
---------------------------------------------------

The added reference in the press release doesn't actually give credit
for the two paragraphs in question, but I don't want to nit pick. 
What was for me the main objective, to call their attention to it and
get some sort of acknowledgement and positive response, has been
achieved.  I'm sure the employee who actually penned the press release
will hear about it.

Thanks for your supportive feedback.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Justice. That's great!

On Jul 20, 2005, at 9:20 AM, Clayton Jones wrote:

> John,
>
> >At least they should give you a source credit or reference Clayton.
>
> Good news.  I sent an email to the Fahey Klein Gallery and the Bill
> Brandt Archive.  The gallery owner responded immediately saying they
> agreed with me, but that the press release was written by the Bill
> Brandt Archive in London and they will surely respond.  This morning I
> received the following:
> ______________________________________________
> Thanks for your email regarding the information on the Bill Brandt
> carbon print show at the Fahey Klein Gallery and associated
> information on our website.
>
> We are grateful for your site for the added information on this
> printing process. We have dealt with your comments immediately by
> adding a reference to your website here
> <http://www.billbrandt.com/News/Current%20Exhibiti
> ons/Press%20release/pressreleasefkg.html>
>
> and apologise for the lack of prior acknowledgement.
>
> We do not condone any kind of copyright infringement and send our
> sincere apologies for any misunderstanding.
>
> kind regards,
>
> John-Paul Kernot
> Director
>
> Bill Brandt Archive Ltd
> 4 Airlie Gardens
> London W87AJ
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> The added reference in the press release doesn't actually give credit
> for the two paragraphs in question, but I don't want to nit pick.
> What was for me the main objective, to call their attention to it and
> get some sort of acknowledgement and positive response, has been
> achieved.  I'm sure the employee who actually penned the press release
> will hear about it.
>
> Thanks for your supportive feedback.
>
> Regards,
> Clayton
>
>
> Info on black and white digital printing at
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you  
> wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by  
> visiting this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules  
> and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the  
> group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines�  
> in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE  
> �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,  
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER  
> INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL  
> BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF  
> SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE  
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO  
> OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR  
> CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO  
> GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Digital photography technique	Digital photography	Digital  
> photography software
> Photography school	Professional digital photography	Stock photography
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.
>
>  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>



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

Good Job Clayton,

Just goes to show how uninformed and careless these gallery people can be. Brandt would 
turn over in his grave.

We had a show here  in a major photo gallery where they were showing LIghtjet or Lamda 
prints of a well known artist. I know they were digital because they had terrible banding in 
the tonal transitions, the kind which only digital files can produce. It was obvious to me 
and my students. Those were the kind of prints we would throw in the trash immediately 
and I would make em rescan em. When I asked the gallery owner and director how they 
were made she said " oh they are just color darkroom prints, type c prints I believe, I think 
they are type c prints, but they certainly aren't created digitally". Now that blew my mind 
because they were obviously bad scans and we were really laughing about it.

You would think that someone who is responsible for communicating WHY and under what 
conditions these artists are selling prints for many thousands of dollars that they would do 
their homwork, but I guess that's to much to ask of them. I imagine they think rich people 
don't care about these things or its not a priority.......

In your case what they did was like a kid stealing his homework off the web and getting 
caught. I love when that happens. But at least they admitted it. I guess it was too poorly 
stolen to even deny. You should ask for a Brandt print in order not to publish an open 
letter response to their carelessness. They would probably give one to you ( but it would 
be Ultrachrome and you probably wouldn't want it? )

John

PS - Why won't my text wrap in Safari, it looks horrible. My IE is no longer functioning and 
apparently MS is not updating it for Mac anymore. What are you guys using for browsers.






--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@c...> wrote:

> Justice. That's great!
> 
> On Jul 20, 2005, at 9:20 AM, Clayton Jones wrote:
> 
> > John,
> >
> > >At least they should give you a source credit or reference Clayton.
> >
> > Good news.  I sent an email to the Fahey Klein Gallery and the Bill
> > Brandt Archive.  The gallery owner responded immediately saying they
> > agreed with me, but that the press release was written by the Bill
> > Brandt Archive in London and they will surely respond.  This morning I
> > received the following:
> > ______________________________________________
> > Thanks for your email regarding the information on the Bill Brandt
> > carbon print show at the Fahey Klein Gallery and associated
> > information on our website.
> >
> > We are grateful for your site for the added information on this
> > printing process. We have dealt with your comments immediately by
> > adding a reference to your website here
> > <http://www.billbrandt.com/News/Current%20Exhibiti
> > ons/Press%20release/pressreleasefkg.html>
> >
> > and apologise for the lack of prior acknowledgement.
> >
> > We do not condone any kind of copyright infringement and send our
> > sincere apologies for any misunderstanding.
> >
> > kind regards,
> >
> > John-Paul Kernot
> > Director
> >
> > Bill Brandt Archive Ltd
> > 4 Airlie Gardens
> > London W87AJ
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> >
> > The added reference in the press release doesn't actually give credit
> > for the two paragraphs in question, but I don't want to nit pick.
> > What was for me the main objective, to call their attention to it and
> > get some sort of acknowledgement and positive response, has been
> > achieved.  I'm sure the employee who actually penned the press release
> > will hear about it.
> >
> > Thanks for your supportive feedback.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Clayton
> >
> >
> > Info on black and white digital printing at
> > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> > resources as they are often being updated.
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you  
> > wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by  
> > visiting this same page.
> >
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> > to keep them short.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> > flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> > from the membership without notice.
> > - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> > B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> > removed from the membership.
> > - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules  
> > and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the  
> > group Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines"  
> > in the Files section:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> >
> > BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> > PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE  
> > "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> > NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> > CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,  
> > DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER  
> > INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL  
> > BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF  
> > SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE  
> > THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO  
> > OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR  
> > CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO  
> > GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> > PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> > Digital photography technique	Digital photography	Digital  
> > photography software
> > Photography school	Professional digital photography	Stock photography
> >
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.
> >
> >  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

-Carbro certainly isn't "implied." Nothing is implied. On this very
Yahoo site there was a recent longwinded  bs session about "what
should we call these prints" (as if it mattered in pseudo-ansel
calendar photos). 
One conclusion was that "we" should call them "carbon prints."

I don't think anybody here knows what Brandt would have wanted, or
what would have caused him to "turn over in his grave." Certainly many
of his own prints were mediocre (as were Ansel's at one time)...this
was back when a photographer's vision was more important than
obsession with desitometry or pursuit of hobbiest techniques, such as
carbro.

John Kelly


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

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Djon"
> <westsidemaurice@y...> wrote:
> ...
> > That damn gallery BETTER be showing honest carbon inkjets: Brandt, of 
> > all photographers, would want that! 
> 
> 
> "An important aspect of the process is that it is an ink on paper
> medium,..."
> 
> that would imply inkjet
> 
> "... not a light-sensitive emulsion, and therefore is more akin to
> gravure than to silver or platinum prints. Carbon printing is still
> practised today in various forms by those who revere a more permanent
> image."
> 
> That would imply carbro
> 
> mixed message
> 
> Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
>Good Job Clayton,
>Just goes to show how uninformed and careless these gallery people 
>can be. 

Thanks, John.  Please note however that it was not the gallery that
created the press release.  It was created by someone at the Bill
Brandt Archive in London.  This was not the gallery's doing.  

BTW, the Fahey Klein Gallery has an excellent web site:

http://www.faheykleingallery.com/Photographers/pho
tographers_frames.htm


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Djon"
<westsidemaurice@y...> wrote:
> -Carbro certainly isn't "implied."

Certainly by mentioning Adolphe Poitevin carbro is conjured.

> Nothing is implied.

Implied, suggested, referenced, sorry, my use of language is not of a
high level.

> On this very
> Yahoo site there was a recent longwinded  bs session about "what
> should we call these prints" (as if it mattered in pseudo-ansel
> calendar photos). 
> One conclusion was that "we" should call them "carbon prints."

It's not a good moniker, no matter what "we" decided. It's not direct
and informative, and consistently conjures this discussion about
historical carbon printing. So in fact it could be accused of
attempting to elevate itself by association, which this press release
clearly tries to do. The saving grace is that they do mange to squeeze
the word "ink" in there.
They should be called inkjet prints, that's what they are. If further
elaboration by inclusion of materials like carbon or process like
quadtone are added that's fine, as it informs. Toned Gelatin Silver
informed, everyone knew what it meant.
After all these years of hard work, we need not feel inferior about
our tools or process and avoid disclosure. The prints are beautiful
and have admirable longevity.
Those who cringe when you tell them prints are inkjet have some
catching up to do, and less than forthcoming behavior on our part does
not help them do so.
Wouldn't it have been good for all of us if that press release
proclaimed in nice proud verbiage that they are inkjet?
Tyler

> Wouldn't it have been good for all of us if that press release
> proclaimed in nice proud verbiage that they are inkjet?
> Tyler


Of course, but if you look at the price tag that these things will ultimately have attached to 
them you can understand their nervousness. But, essentially I agree with you a better term 
would be carbon inkjet or carbon digital inkjet print - to distinguish from carbro and 
impermanent inksets, which there are many. The layman can't possibly be expected to sort 
out all the permutations. You know that is interesting, the association with carbro. In many 
ways though what you do Tyler is a historical decendent of carbro. Sure they are done with 
pigments and studio print rip and not a gelatin transer process, and no the longevity 
figures aren't exactly the same, but they are related. And we sure have alot more control 
these days. Now that is what they should have pointed out in that press release as good 
historians, your right. Point out the similarities AND differences of these imaging cousins 
two centuries apart.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> 
> > Wouldn't it have been good for all of us if that press release
> > proclaimed in nice proud verbiage that they are inkjet?
> > Tyler
> 
> 
> Of course, but if you look at the price tag that these things will ultimately have attached 
to 
> them you can understand their nervousness.


The 30x40 prints are priced on the Bill Brandt Archive website at a little over $7300... 
4250 Pounds plus VAT.

Ed

John, I understand your point completely. I guess I'm a bit pissy on
this issue from the constant "concern" expressed out there about
inkjet. These same people will hang a show of Iris prints by
Rauschenburg, Close, or Hockney with no second thought about
longevity. Why? Because they will sell, Period.
So sometimes the punk in me wants to jam the inkjet issue back in
their faces. There isn't a problem, they are keeping the misconception
alive with their false "concern".
OK, got that off my chest, back to work.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> 
> > Wouldn't it have been good for all of us if that press release
> > proclaimed in nice proud verbiage that they are inkjet?
> > Tyler
> 
> 
> Of course, but if you look at the price tag that these things will
ultimately have attached to 
> them you can understand their nervousness. But, essentially I agree
with you a better term 
> would be carbon inkjet or carbon digital inkjet print - to
distinguish from carbro and 
> impermanent inksets, which there are many. The layman can't possibly
be expected to sort 
> out all the permutations. You know that is interesting, the
association with carbro. In many 
> ways though what you do Tyler is a historical decendent of carbro.
Sure they are done with 
> pigments and studio print rip and not a gelatin transer process, and
no the longevity 
> figures aren't exactly the same, but they are related. And we sure
have alot more control 
> these days. Now that is what they should have pointed out in that
press release as good 
> historians, your right. Point out the similarities AND differences
of these imaging cousins 
> two centuries apart.

I know. We've lived with that for years. And you are jamming it to them precisely because 
of the quality of your work and the durability it will have. You can sleep at night knowing 
when Rauchenberg and Hockneys prints are gone yours will look like new. Our big photo 
gallery here for years told me they wouldn't show digital, especially "ink jet". Then I walked 
in one day and there they were, Bill Wegman's dogs scanned from Polaroids and printed 
with Iris to sell for thousands each in fairly large editions I believe. I guess Elton John 
made em do it. Your right, they showed those because they would sell... and if Wegman 
was doing it.... and Elton John was buying it....

Little did they think that the "original" polaroids done in Cambridge on the 20x24 20 years 
ago were  turning green by then and they had to do something to salvage them. So.. they 
made impermanent Iris editions of impermanent Polaroids.( now that Kodak just bought 
Iris hopefully they'll finish off that distraction). Gallery business is not logical and the more 
one tries to put reason into it the harder it gets. The only thing I've found that works is to 
deal  directly with the artists involved ( presuming they are still alive) and reason with 
them if you can. Usually the artist has more sense and will get his way with the gallery if 
he's informed and determined. But then again I don't usually deal with big names and big 
politics, at least not yet.

What really kills me though in terms of time lag is if you go to Ny to the big museums and 
galleries you will see giant type c prints almost exclusively for large color output. The 
Modern, the Whitney, and the Met don't  think twice about buying 10 - 20 foot long C 
prints but I didn't see one inkjet print in any of those places that I can remember. And 
we're talking about big big money for these things that really won't last.  Now mabie I'm 
biased but it just seems strange to bizarre to me. You watch, in a couple of years you'll 
seee Epson prints everywhere and by then color coupler output will probably be almost 
dead and Iris will be a distant memory.

 My scans are done, time to be productive.....and quit blabbing.

John



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

> John, I understand your point completely. I guess I'm a bit pissy on
> this issue from the constant "concern" expressed out there about
> inkjet. These same people will hang a show of Iris prints by
> Rauschenburg, Close, or Hockney with no second thought about
> longevity. Why? Because they will sell, Period.
> So sometimes the punk in me wants to jam the inkjet issue back in
> their faces. There isn't a problem, they are keeping the misconception
> alive with their false "concern".
> OK, got that off my chest, back to work.
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Wouldn't it have been good for all of us if that press release
> > > proclaimed in nice proud verbiage that they are inkjet?
> > > Tyler
> > 
> > 
> > Of course, but if you look at the price tag that these things will
> ultimately have attached to 
> > them you can understand their nervousness. But, essentially I agree
> with you a better term 
> > would be carbon inkjet or carbon digital inkjet print - to
> distinguish from carbro and 
> > impermanent inksets, which there are many. The layman can't possibly
> be expected to sort 
> > out all the permutations. You know that is interesting, the
> association with carbro. In many 
> > ways though what you do Tyler is a historical decendent of carbro.
> Sure they are done with 
> > pigments and studio print rip and not a gelatin transer process, and
> no the longevity 
> > figures aren't exactly the same, but they are related. And we sure
> have alot more control 
> > these days. Now that is what they should have pointed out in that
> press release as good 
> > historians, your right. Point out the similarities AND differences
> of these imaging cousins 
> > two centuries apart.

i have lurked here for years with only an occassional email to someone, 
but i understand your irritation, tyler . . . i would prefer to 
represent my work as exactly what it is and have respect for it in 
whatever medium(s) i choose, and hopefully it will last a reasonable 
time!       . . . rather than a photographer (though i certainly take a 
lot of photographs that i use in one way or another and sometimes as 
PHOTOGRAPHS!), i am a painter and used to be an etcher/etc/printmaker 
and i am having a grand time with my new tools . . . and that is exactly 
what all these things ARE . . . TOOLS . . . i have thought a lot over 
these years about what i will sign upon the final work and i used to put 
"Archival UC" since i use the 2200 and the inks are ultrachrome as they 
stand . . . i am thinking about putting "Archival Digital Inkjet CBTA"   
 . . . archival digital inkjet controlled by the artist . . . well, 
maybe . . . then again, i am still thinking on it . . .

thanks to all of you for your great advice (i just ignore the flame when 
it flares) and for your great work (and even lesser, but all is 
interesting in some way) as i look at it all a lot and store the pearls 
of advice in my head for the moment the need strikes!   jwp

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> 
> > Wouldn't it have been good for all of us if that press release
> > proclaimed in nice proud verbiage that they are inkjet?
> > Tyler
> 
> 
> Of course, but if you look at the price tag that these things will
ultimately have attached to 
> them you can understand their nervousness.

I don't think they're being "nervous." And I don't think "carbon"
confuses anybody. Carbro, on the other hand, is primarily of historic
interest, as opposed to imagemaking interest...if someone works with
carbro today, it's up to THEM to belabor "carbro" Vs "carbon."

Perhaps we/someone should define "carbon ink" more clearly, mentioning
specifics that have to do with likely permanence...that might be
helpful to galleries.

How much have "carbon" inkjet prints sold for in galleries up to now?




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Djon" <
westsidemaurice@y...> wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Wouldn't it have been good for all of us if that press release
> > > proclaimed in nice proud verbiage that they are inkjet?
> > > Tyler
> > 
> > 
> > Of course, but if you look at the price tag that these things will
> ultimately have attached to 
> > them you can understand their nervousness.
> 
> I don't think they're being "nervous." And I don't think "carbon"
> confuses anybody. Carbro, on the other hand, is primarily of historic
> interest, as opposed to imagemaking interest...if someone works with
> carbro today, it's up to THEM to belabor "carbro" Vs "carbon."
> 
> Perhaps we/someone should define "carbon ink" more clearly, mentioning
> specifics that have to do with likely permanence...that might be
> helpful to galleries.

I have not followed this thread completely, so maybe I am misunderstanding
something.  As the author or several articles on (traditional) Carbon
printing, I must say that Carbro (using Bromide print)  is simply a
variation of the Carbon process(AmDichromate sensitization, contact print
via actinic light).  Thus, I think that using the term Carbon print for an
ink jet print is misleading.  J Vee


On 7/24/05 12:09 AM, "Djon" <westsidemaurice@...> wrote:
> 
> I don't think they're being "nervous." And I don't think "carbon"
> confuses anybody. Carbro, on the other hand, is primarily of historic
> interest, as opposed to imagemaking interest...if someone works with
> carbro today, it's up to THEM to belabor "carbro" Vs "carbon."
> 



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

To convince gallery owners and patrons that "carbon" means
"AmDichromate sensitization, contact print
 via actinic light"  would require a pretty substantial PR campaign.

In any case, carbon printing substantially predates photography
...think of the images in the caves of Lascaux. 

And inkjets in carbon printing are easy enough to explain in ephemera
accompanying prints. Hard to imagine that art patrons care. Hopefully
they are more interested in the image. 

IMO it's a good thing for galleries, patrons, and photographers to
minimize the chemistry and optics in discussion of photo images (is it
necessary to mention D76 or Rodenstock?), and it's a good thing to
remove the digital geek-talk. Attention should be focused on the
images, not the process.





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, J Vee
<j.vee@g...> wrote:
> I have not followed this thread completely, so maybe I am
misunderstanding
> something.  As the author or several articles on (traditional) Carbon
> printing, I must say that Carbro (using Bromide print)  is simply a
> variation of the Carbon process(AmDichromate sensitization, contact
print
> via actinic light).  Thus, I think that using the term Carbon print
for an

> ink jet print is misleading.  J Vee
> 
> 
> On 7/24/05 12:09 AM, "Djon" <westsidemaurice@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > I don't think they're being "nervous." And I don't think "carbon"
> > confuses anybody. Carbro, on the other hand, is primarily of historic
> > interest, as opposed to imagemaking interest...if someone works with
> > carbro today, it's up to THEM to belabor "carbro" Vs "carbon."
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

In a perfect geek free world unfortunately :)

On Jul 25, 2005, at 4:21 PM, Djon wrote:

> Attention should be focused on the
> images, not the process.

amen

woody spedden


--- Djon <westsidemaurice@...> wrote:


---------------------------------
 

To convince gallery owners and patrons that "carbon"
means
"AmDichromate sensitization, contact print
 via actinic light"  would require a pretty
substantial PR campaign.

In any case, carbon printing substantially predates
photography
...think of the images in the caves of Lascaux. 

And inkjets in carbon printing are easy enough to
explain in ephemera
accompanying prints. Hard to imagine that art patrons
care. Hopefully
they are more interested in the image. 

IMO it's a good thing for galleries, patrons, and
photographers to
minimize the chemistry and optics in discussion of
photo images (is it
necessary to mention D76 or Rodenstock?), and it's a
good thing to
remove the digital geek-talk. Attention should be
focused on the
images, not the process.





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, J
Vee
<j.vee@g...> wrote:
> I have not followed this thread completely, so maybe
I am
misunderstanding
> something.  As the author or several articles on
(traditional) Carbon
> printing, I must say that Carbro (using Bromide
print)  is simply a
> variation of the Carbon process(AmDichromate
sensitization, contact
print
> via actinic light).  Thus, I think that using the
term Carbon print
for an
> ink jet print is misleading.  J Vee
> 
> 
> On 7/24/05 12:09 AM, "Djon" <westsidemaurice@y...>
wrote:
> > 
> > I don't think they're being "nervous." And I don't
think "carbon"
> > confuses anybody. Carbro, on the other hand, is
primarily of historic
> > interest, as opposed to imagemaking interest...if
someone works with
> > carbro today, it's up to THEM to belabor "carbro"
Vs "carbon."
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]




Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files,
and other resources as they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily
digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your
Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of
earlier messages to keep them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal
attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or
argumentative users may be removed from the membership
without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group
topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently
make off-topic posts may be removed from the
membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the
group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the
actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd in
the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE
DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY
UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd
OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN
IF THE  \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE
PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY
OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE
INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO
GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF
YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR
CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE
PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING
TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.


      

      SPONSORED LINKS  
                                               
Digital photography technique                         
          Digital photography                         
          Digital photography software                
                                              
Photography school                                   
Professional digital photography                      
             Stock photography                        
                            
    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

  
    Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on
the web.
   
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
   
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.

  
---------------------------------