Digital BW, The Print

Today I saw the GAP's show, which precedes its release of the 
book "Individuals" ( I think it might have closed today)

(Info here: 
http://gapinc.gapinc.com/public/Media/Press_Releases/med_pr_Ga
pIndividuals092006.shtml)

These are very large prints of the photos in the book. Some were 
bigger than life size, and many were stunning. On the other hand, 
the exhibit helped me be a little less hard on my own work. I'm not 
positive if all were printed on inkjet, but many or most were, from 
film or digital originals. 

Some of the things that surprised me (for a museum exhibit) were: 

-wavy prints--many didn't appear to have anything to stiffen them on 
the back;
-dirty glass!
-banding! A photo of Anh Duong had visibile banding (my wife didn't 
notice at first, but did when i pointed it out).
-green or magenta prints. A group of B+W prints had very visible 
color casts. To me these were not warm or cool tones, but it might 
simply have been the placement of "cooler" prints near "warmer" 
prints.

All in all, an interesting show, and a learning experience.

-matt



X-PMFLAGS: 16384 0 1 INETSIG.PMS                            

--
Matt Haber
dance, portrait and fashion photography
http://www.matthaber.com

Hello Matt,

Thanks for the report.

>-wavy prints--many didn't appear to have anything to stiffen them on 
>the back;
>-dirty glass!
>-banding! A photo of Anh Duong had visibile banding (my wife didn't 
>notice at first, but did when i pointed it out).
>-green or magenta prints. A group of B+W prints had very visible 
>color casts. To me these were not warm or cool tones, but it might 
>simply have been the placement of "cooler" prints near "warmer" 
>prints.

Reading this, I had a thought that perhaps we are now in the early
stages of ink prints going mainstream and finally becoming accepted by
galleries, museums, shows, etc, but that the operators of these venues
may not know enough about the technology yet (like we do who are using
it) to have established standards of what is acceptable, or what the
difference is between a good and a poor print (in terms of dither
banding, micro banding, coloration, posterization, etc - the things
that we deal with on a regular basis).

In this case, I wonder if the operator of the venue was aware of the
banding, and if so did he/she see it as a defect and decide to show
the work anyway, or maybe accepted it as something normal for this
type of print?  As for the artist, I wonder if he/she made the prints
or farmed them out, and was he/she aware of the banding, and if so,
what sort of thought processes went into giving a passing grade to them.

Is there a need for some sort of ISO-type industry standards group to
define and publish technical standards?


Regards,
Clayton


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@...> wrote:
> 
> Is there a need for some sort of ISO-type industry standards group to
> define and publish technical standards?
> 
> 


NO! Defects are unacceptable! But I guess that is just my own opinion. 
I would never let anything that showed obvious printing defects out of 
my shop! If "we" want this form of printing technology to be taken as 
serious art, this is the standard that we must strive to achieve. As we 
know, anyone can turn out a print on the inkjet at home which is what 
we need to fight against.

Or, do we need to step way back and remember this IS art and subject
to personal interpretation of what is important and what is not.
Should there be any rules at all, much less "standards"?

This is starting to remind me of "perfect photos" of test targets. 

Bob Michaels

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@...> wrote:

> Reading this, I had a thought that perhaps we are now in the early
> stages of ink prints going mainstream and finally becoming accepted by
> galleries, museums, shows, etc, but that the operators of these venues
> may not know enough about the technology yet (like we do who are using
> it) to have established standards of what is acceptable, or what the
> difference is between a good and a poor print (in terms of dither
> banding, micro banding, coloration, posterization, etc - the things
> that we deal with on a regular basis).
> 
> In this case, I wonder if the operator of the venue was aware of the
> banding, and if so did he/she see it as a defect and decide to show
> the work anyway, or maybe accepted it as something normal for this
> type of print?  As for the artist, I wonder if he/she made the prints
> or farmed them out, and was he/she aware of the banding, and if so,
> what sort of thought processes went into giving a passing grade to them.
> 
> Is there a need for some sort of ISO-type industry standards group to
> define and publish technical standards?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>