Okay, just printed these four yesterday for a Palm Springs location. Warm-tone, as they requested, and rather large. The squares were 20x20 and the 35mm were 16x20 prints. I used a polished rag paper, which if you are looking for paper that "resembles" traditional silver paper, then this could be a great place to start.
Look, EVERYONE making paper is trying to find something to match silver. And let's not forget, they have been for a long, long while, and they are getting closer, but to me, they should just relax and make a good paper. There is no sense in trying to "match" anything because the reality is they never will.
You might technically match the look, and if they do, great, but they are missing the point. The prints, silver and digital, are MADE differently.
Why do collectors favor darkroom prints? Because the printer MADE the print, and no matter how hard they try, they can't produce two identical prints. Consequently, when the collector buys a silver print they are a buying a unique object.
Now the digital crowd can't stand this reality, and have many ways of trying to wiggle into this conversation, but the reality is they are just different items. Is one better than the other? No, not at all, and in fact I make probably ten digital prints for every silver print I make. Time, convenience, and certain films, I think, look better printed digitally then traditionally.
But I do understand the collector point of view.
Is this changing? Of course. Is it changing for the better? Not really, more because the paper is going away. It is really nice to spend time in the dark making prints, just as it is making them with the latest gadgets.
The most important part is making the images in the first place.
1 comment:
Gasp, that second one!
PS I can't believe how much you are doing on your blog. so impressive.
Post a Comment