Digital BW, The Print

Hi Guys,
I search the opportunity to certificate the inkjet print with
organization or institute.
I see this:

http://www.fineartstitle.com

Thanks.

Max

Bull(cough)it, I feel.
Mark

On Aug 3, 2007, at 7:05 AM, massimiliano_liva wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> I search the opportunity to certificate the inkjet print with
> organization or institute.
> I see this:
>
> http://www.fineartstitle.com
>
> Thanks.
>
> Max
>

I only glanced briefly at the site, but the wisdom of paying for such
a service aside, it really highlihts the issue of personal
responsibility and integrity of the artist. Today, digital makes it so
much easier to produce multiples and reproductions in virtually
unlimited quantities of identical quality. If you choose to edition
your work in limited quantities (like I do) you obviously need to
assure a buyer that you will honor the terms under which you are
pricing and selling the print. Making your own print
documentation/certification is straightforward and easy to do, IF you
keep organized and detailed records of your output. Keeping these
detailed records can also help avoid the insurace claim nightmares
mentioned on that site.
At the end of the day, the buyer is depending on your  (or your
representative's) reputation for integrity. As a buyer, if I didn't
trust a particular artist, it wouldn't matter to me what
"certification" they offered. By contrast, I've found that when
selling my work directly, a little personal contact with the buyer
goes a long way. The web is a fantastic tool for showing your work,
but when it comes to purchases of art, I make a point to speak, via
phone or in person with the buyer. In these conversations I give as
much information about the work as possible, offer general guidance on
handling and display, and explain that there will be signed
documentation with each print. I've never yet had a buyer ask about
how I will ensure the integrity of the edition, and I take that as a
sign that they are confident in my integrity.
-- 
amadou diallo
Author, Mastering Digital Black and White
www.masteringdigitalbwbook.com

fwiw, This kind of concern is commonly handled by an accompanying 
note, describing the image, identifying factors (size/type of image 
on size/type of paper etc), date, signature etc., specifying the 
buyer (to facilitate tracking).  

It might be of no great concern to people whose clients buy prints 
for visual reasons 

I don't think Adams or Weston ever had this concern. It's certainly 
easy to imagine a fine copy neg made from one of their prints, 
printed upon some lovely silver paper, perhaps aged, sold 
as "orignial". Digital is no more magical than optical. 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "amadou diallo" 
<amadiallo@...> wrote:
>
> I only glanced briefly at the site, but the wisdom of paying for 
such
> a service aside, it really highlihts the issue of personal
> responsibility and integrity of the artist. Today, digital makes 
it so
> much easier to produce multiples and reproductions in virtually
> unlimited quantities of identical quality. If you choose to edition
> your work in limited quantities (like I do) you obviously need to
> assure a buyer that you will honor the terms under which you are
> pricing and selling the print. Making your own print
> documentation/certification is straightforward and easy to do, IF 
you
> keep organized and detailed records of your output. Keeping these
> detailed records can also help avoid the insurace claim nightmares
> mentioned on that site.
> At the end of the day, the buyer is depending on your  (or your
> representative's) reputation for integrity. As a buyer, if I didn't
> trust a particular artist, it wouldn't matter to me what
> "certification" they offered. By contrast, I've found that when
> selling my work directly, a little personal contact with the buyer
> goes a long way. The web is a fantastic tool for showing your work,
> but when it comes to purchases of art, I make a point to speak, via
> phone or in person with the buyer. In these conversations I give as
> much information about the work as possible, offer general 
guidance on
> handling and display, and explain that there will be signed
> documentation with each print. I've never yet had a buyer ask about
> how I will ensure the integrity of the edition, and I take that as 
a

> sign that they are confident in my integrity.
> -- 
> amadou diallo
> Author, Mastering Digital Black and White
> www.masteringdigitalbwbook.com
>

It's certainly 
asy to imagine a fine copy neg made from one of their prints, 
rinted upon some lovely silver paper, perhaps aged, sold 
s "orignial". Digital is no more magical than optical. 

I'd say that one is hard to imagine. Copy negs always lose some of the original, even in large format copying.

Richard Massie

-----Original Message-----
From: djon43 <djon43@yahoo.com>
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:30 pm
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Inkjet Fine Art Certification.



fwiw, This kind of concern is commonly handled by an accompanying 
ote, describing the image, identifying factors (size/type of image 
n size/type of paper etc), date, signature etc., specifying the 
uyer (to facilitate tracking).  
It might be of no great concern to people whose clients buy prints 
or visual reasons 
I don't think Adams or Weston ever had this concern. It's certainly 
asy to imagine a fine copy neg made from one of their prints, 
rinted upon some lovely silver paper, perhaps aged, sold 
s "orignial". Digital is no more magical than optical. 

-- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "amadou diallo" 
amadiallo@...> wrote:

 I only glanced briefly at the site, but the wisdom of paying for 
uch
 a service aside, it really highlihts the issue of personal
 responsibility and integrity of the artist. Today, digital makes 
t so
 much easier to produce multiples and reproductions in virtually
 unlimited quantities of identical quality. If you choose to edition
 your work in limited quantities (like I do) you obviously need to
 assure a buyer that you will honor the terms under which you are
 pricing and selling the print. Making your own print
 documentation/certification is straightforward and easy to do, IF 
ou
 keep organized and detailed records of your output. Keeping these
 detailed records can also help avoid the insurace claim nightmares
 mentioned on that site.
 At the end of the day, the buyer is depending on your  (or your
 representative's) reputation for integrity. As a buyer, if I didn't
 trust a particular artist, it wouldn't matter to me what
 "certification" they offered. By contrast, I've found that when
 selling my work directly, a little personal contact with the buyer
 goes a long way. The web is a fantastic tool for showing your work,
 but when it comes to purchases of art, I make a point to speak, via
 phone or in person with the buyer. In these conversations I give as
 much information about the work as possible, offer general 
uidance on
 handling and display, and explain that there will be signed
 documentation with each print. I've never yet had a buyer ask about
 how I will ensure the integrity of the edition, and I take that as 

 sign that they are confident in my integrity.
 -- 
 amadou diallo
 Author, Mastering Digital Black and White
 www.masteringdigitalbwbook.com



lease visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they 
re 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 
nsubscribe, 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 
hort.
 Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, 
ggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without 
otice.
 Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
rinting. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the 
embership.
 By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, 
nd to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See 
Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the Files section:
ttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! 
ROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF 
IGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, 
NDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT 
OT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER 
NTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE 
RINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
ESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
AHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR 
ATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
RINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
RINT YAHOO GROUP.

ahoo! Groups Links
   Individual Email | Traditional
   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.


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

"I'd say that one is hard to imagine. Copy negs always lose some of
the original, even in large format copying."

A) I am exceptionally good at copy negs and there are plenty who are
better. 

B) "Even in large format..." indicates that someone lacks the basic
skills to do the job because any skilled person would assume from the
beginning that large format would be used, along with a proper flat
field lens...there's no "even" to it. 

C) The buyer won't compare to an original, he'll simply buy what he sees.
   
D) If it's important to certify, a normally intelligent buyer or
seller will hire a recognized appraiser (eg http://www.sothebys.com)
to do it with credibility.  

E) Any local ambulance-chasing attorney can do a better job certifying
originality than can a bozo with a website. 

 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, CorrPro96@... wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> It's certainly 
> asy to imagine a fine copy neg made from one of their prints, 
> rinted upon some lovely silver paper, perhaps aged, sold 
> s "orignial". Digital is no more magical than optical. 
> 
> I'd say that one is hard to imagine. Copy negs always lose some of
the original, even in large format copying.
> 
> Richard Massie
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: djon43 <djon43@...>
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:30 pm
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Inkjet Fine Art Certification.
> 
> 
> 
> fwiw, This kind of concern is commonly handled by an accompanying 
> ote, describing the image, identifying factors (size/type of image 
> n size/type of paper etc), date, signature etc., specifying the 
> uyer (to facilitate tracking).  
> It might be of no great concern to people whose clients buy prints 
> or visual reasons 
> I don't think Adams or Weston ever had this concern. It's certainly 
> asy to imagine a fine copy neg made from one of their prints, 
> rinted upon some lovely silver paper, perhaps aged, sold 
> s "orignial". Digital is no more magical than optical. 
> 
> -- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "amadou diallo" 
> amadiallo@> wrote:
> 
>  I only glanced briefly at the site, but the wisdom of paying for 
> uch
>  a service aside, it really highlihts the issue of personal
>  responsibility and integrity of the artist. Today, digital makes 
> t so
>  much easier to produce multiples and reproductions in virtually
>  unlimited quantities of identical quality. If you choose to edition
>  your work in limited quantities (like I do) you obviously need to
>  assure a buyer that you will honor the terms under which you are
>  pricing and selling the print. Making your own print
>  documentation/certification is straightforward and easy to do, IF 
> ou
>  keep organized and detailed records of your output. Keeping these
>  detailed records can also help avoid the insurace claim nightmares
>  mentioned on that site.
>  At the end of the day, the buyer is depending on your  (or your
>  representative's) reputation for integrity. As a buyer, if I didn't
>  trust a particular artist, it wouldn't matter to me what
>  "certification" they offered. By contrast, I've found that when
>  selling my work directly, a little personal contact with the buyer
>  goes a long way. The web is a fantastic tool for showing your work,
>  but when it comes to purchases of art, I make a point to speak, via
>  phone or in person with the buyer. In these conversations I give as
>  much information about the work as possible, offer general 
> uidance on
>  handling and display, and explain that there will be signed
>  documentation with each print. I've never yet had a buyer ask about
>  how I will ensure the integrity of the edition, and I take that as 
> 
>  sign that they are confident in my integrity.
>  -- 
>  amadou diallo
>  Author, Mastering Digital Black and White
>  www.masteringdigitalbwbook.com
> 
> 
> 
> lease visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
resources as they 
> re 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 
> nsubscribe, 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 
> hort.
>  Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
flames. Hostile, 
> ggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership
without 
> otice.
>  Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
> rinting. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed
from the 
> embership.
>  By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, 
> nd to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See 
> Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the Files section:
> ttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE
PRINT YAHOO! 
> ROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” AND
“MODERATORS” OF 
> IGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY
DIRECT, 
> NDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES,
INCLUDING BUT 
> OT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR
OTHER 
> NTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF
DIGITAL BW, THE 
> RINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
> ESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW,
THE PRINT 
> AHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR
TRANSMISSIONS OR 
> ATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL
BW, THE 
> RINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL
BW, THE 
> RINT YAHOO GROUP.
> 
> ahoo! Groups Links
>    Individual Email | Traditional
>    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's
free from AOL at AOL.com.

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

In a message dated 8/5/2007 1:18:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
djon43@... writes:

A) I am  exceptionally good at copy negs and there are plenty who are
better.  

B) "Even in large format..." indicates that someone lacks the  basic
skills to do the job because any skilled person would assume from  the
beginning that large format would be used, along with a proper  flat
field lens...there's no "even" to it. 



So are you saying that with your skills you could produce a copy that would  
be the same, or as good as the original?
I don't think so, and I am also very experienced in studio  photography.
 
Richard Massie



************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


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

> 
> So are you saying that with your skills you could produce a copy
that would  be the same, or as good as the original?
> I don't think so, and I am also very experienced in studio  photography.
>  
> Richard Massie
 
Richard, I urge you to re-read.

"Studio photography" skills (whatever you mean by that) and technical
photograhy skills are not necessarily closely related.

"Studio photographers" are so rarely called upon to do demanding
technical photography that they rarely acquire the appropriate skills
or equipment (eg flat field large format lens, polarized light sources
etc). They have no reason to bother. Few do photomicroscopy, for the
same sorts of reasons.

Skilled technical copy photography and skilled wet darkroom work could
readily reproduce Adams or Weston originals and make prints that would
convince many buyers that they had originals. The original topic had
to do with fraudulent copies, not with perfection.

Many original Ansel Adams prints, and a few Edward Westons could
readily be copied and reprinted to look "better" than the originals,
while seeming "authentic". (I've seen many bad AA originals, few bad EW.

It'd be more difficult to make a sufficiently funky-looking copy of an
old AA print than to make an exquisite copy of one of his later,
modern-looking prints...hard to fake fade age, easier to fake modern. 

A good copy of an AA print could easily fool an AA enthusiast or
non-specialist curator. Comparing to the original, it might be hard to
tell which was the original, even with a loupe: There need be zero 
detail loss: print paper is not nearly as high resolution as film. 
Tonality would be hard to match, but it could be closely approximated,
and done repeatedly, once approximated. 

It would be necessary to obtain the same paper AA or EW used...that
would be necessary to perpetrate the rip-off we're discussing. 

Evidently you're sure you can't do good copy work. I presumably can't
do the studio work at which you presumably excel. 

We don't all need to acquire the same skills at high levels. I've shot
a handful of weddings...I'm no good at it. You're evidently no good at
copy work. I think weddings are harder.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "djon43" 
<djon43@...> wrote:
>
>  
> > 
> > So are you saying that with your skills you could produce a copy
> that would  be the same, or as good as the original?
> > I don't think so, and I am also very experienced in studio  
photography.
> >  
> > Richard Massie
>  
> 
Does anyone remember an article that ran in one of the magizines late 
70's early 80's when kodak came out with a new film for copying? I 
can't remember the details but I do remember the article writer did a 
copy of an Ansel print using the new film and even Adams couldn't tell 
the difference between his original print and the copy- it can be done.
Jack

In a message dated 8/6/2007 3:48:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
jnhugo@... writes:

--- In  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "djon43" 
<djon43@...>  wrote:
>
>  
> > 
> > So are you saying  that with your skills you could produce a copy
> that would  be the  same, or as good as the original?
> > I don't think so, and I am also  very experienced in studio  
photography.
> >  
>  > Richard Massie
>  
> 
Does anyone remember an article  that ran in one of the magizines late 
70's early 80's when kodak came out  with a new film for copying? I 
can't remember the details but I do  remember the article writer did a 
copy of an Ansel print using the new  film and even Adams couldn't tell 
the difference between his original  print and the copy- it can be  done.
Jack





I stand corrected. Never had a paying customer who wanted that degree  of 
precision. 
 
Richard Massie



************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at 
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour


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

It was my bread and butter for a while. Most copies looked much better than
original work many times when the pieces were very old. I didn't work on
copies of AA or EW, but good work does produce good results. 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214-827-8301

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

 

Skype : ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
CorrPro96@...
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 3:06 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Inkjet Fine Art Certification.

 


In a message dated 8/6/2007 3:48:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
jnhugo@yahoo. <mailto:jnhugo%40yahoo.com> com writes:

--- In DigitalBlackandWhit
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "djon43" 
<djon43@...> wrote:
>
> 
> > 
> > So are you saying that with your skills you could produce a copy
> that would be the same, or as good as the original?
> > I don't think so, and I am also very experienced in studio 
photography.
> > 
> > Richard Massie
> 
> 
Does anyone remember an article that ran in one of the magizines late 
70's early 80's when kodak came out with a new film for copying? I 
can't remember the details but I do remember the article writer did a 
copy of an Ansel print using the new film and even Adams couldn't tell 
the difference between his original print and the copy- it can be done.
Jack

I stand corrected. Never had a paying customer who wanted that degree of 
precision. 

Richard Massie

************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL
at 
http://discover. <http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour>
aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

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

 



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

"jnhugo" <jnhugo@...> wrote:

Please note: JN Hugo mistakenly attributed Richard Massie's comment
(below) to me: I had disagreed: Professional copy skills CAN READILY
equal or "improve" originals well enough to fool demanding people. I
didn't say "perfectly match."  

Excellent fraudulent copies would be easy for a traditionally skilled
technician (such as many of us here), depending on the forensic
expertise of the buyer.

 "Experienced in studio photography" doesn't suggest a person is
competent at copy work, just as "competent at copy work" doesn't
suggest good Senior Portraits.

John Kelly

> > > So are you saying that with your skills you could produce a copy
> > that would  be the same, or as good as the original?
> > > I don't think so, and I am also very experienced in studio  
> photography.
> > >  
> > > Richard Massie

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "djon43" 

Sorry djon43-my bad cutting skills!
Jack (jnhugo)

<djon43@...> wrote:

>
>   "jnhugo" <jnhugo@> wrote:
> 
> Please note: JN Hugo mistakenly attributed Richard Massie's comment
> (below) to me: I had disagreed: Professional copy skills CAN READILY
> equal or "improve" originals well enough to fool demanding people.

If you follow Richard Benson's line, you can make a much better copy of 
a photograph via printing (press) than by photographic copy....

as he did with the book Photographs from the Gilman Paper Collection

http://www.ursusbooks.com/item37462.html

JNHugo..I was just being picky. No problem. John Kelly

> 
> Sorry djon43-my bad cutting skills!
> Jack (jnhugo)
> 
> <djon43@> wrote:
> >
> >   "jnhugo" <jnhugo@> wrote:
> > 
> > Please note: JN Hugo mistakenly attributed Richard Massie's comment
> > (below) to me: I had disagreed: Professional copy skills CAN READILY
> > equal or "improve" originals well enough to fool demanding people.
>

Ansel demonstrated the same thing years ago...exquisite potential
precision matching tone-for-tone using halftone and printing press. 

HOWEVER that perfect match isn't necessarily "better" than optical,
it's just different. Changes in the course of copying are often
visually "better." 

The original topic here dealt with "certification" of originality, ie
a fraud question: fraud be much easier optically than with ink,
especially as the original wasn't a halftone :-)

In reality, few know or care if a copy matches an original with
tone-for-tone precision, they attend to the looks of the image,
perhaps not even thinking to ask about authenticity. 

Many of Ansel's originals can certainly be optically copied and
reprinted to "look better" (you know this if you've seen his early and
occasionally not-so-great Polaroid work)...one can improve on an
original with scan and lithography as well...was actually demonstrated
by Ansel himself, when he went back to his originals to produce his
ultimate book.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Atherton"
<timatherton@...> wrote:

>
> If you follow Richard Benson's line, you can make a much better copy of 
> a photograph via printing (press) than by photographic copy....
> 
> as he did with the book Photographs from the Gilman Paper Collection
> 
> http://www.ursusbooks.com/item37462.html
>