Hi Dave
I thought I'd let you know that my 'Promenade' print arrived this morning.
Its amazing! You're right about the grey tones; there's a goregous three
dimensional quality as the trees fade in the distance; I could just take a
stroll down there! Its going next to Nightstorm on my wall so when I wake
in the morning I can see something that inspires me.
Print arrived in superb condition with no creases, bumps or bangs; you
have packaging down to an art too!
I'll have to start thinking about what I want next, 'Brooklyn Bridge
Crossing' or 'Roosevelt Island Tram' are high on the list. Hope you've
recovered from the trauma of international posting for Promenade!
Thanks again Dave, pleasure doing business with you!
Allan
* * *
One of the ironies of living through the switch from darkroom to inkjet is that an inkjet print still doesn't have the - je ne sais quoi - of a darkroom print. For the regular Joe out there - an inkjet print is still related to that junk that comes out of their home printer.
That will change someday just as I have pencils all over the house but can't draw a lick.
The irony, as you can see from yesterday's price list, is that the cost of producing the fine art inkjet print is probably double the cost of the same darkroom print. In fact, thinking about it, I'm ballparking it - the quantity of ink used increase with the square (the area) of the final print and so ink costs zoom at that rate - rather than at a linear rate. You know what I mean.
This is a good subject for someone out there to investigate - the cost of producing an inkjet print compared to a fine-art darkroom print. Other expenses come to mind for the inkjet print that have no equivalent on the darkroom end: software upgrades, cleaning cycles, storage for the digital files.
The major difference is in the time to reproduce the next one. It may take as long or longer to produce your first version of the inkjet print. Maybe you'll spend days making test prints and corrections in Photoshop. Maybe not. But once you feel you've got it - and if you've got your process down - then you leap ahead - as the amount of labor to make inkjet reproductions is minimal compared to the darkroom experience.
3 comments:
"The film can be rescanned five years from now but the five year old digital capture may well be looked upon as a curious antique, not up to the standards of the day?"
That's a good point. In fact, digital is in effect your film, except that it's a part of the camera. When you want the latest digital film, you need to get a new camera. I wonder whether this will change so that various sensors for different purposes could be used in interchangeable cameras.
here some insights about resolution, noise and
pixel size... the digital race will not go on forever...
http://www.pbase.com/lou_giroud/camra
My head hurts too. Can't believe I read that all the way through. Had the sense of someone who knows what they're talking about being strained through a bad translation.
Post a Comment