report from Chicago

[David Luttmann]

Easy Tim,

You pick the Silver one that doesn't look as nice because that makes it REAL ART!

LOL.

[robert_4927]

I ask for a simple "which print would you buy". you give me aesthic values and go off about lenses and Walker Evans prints and totally dance around a very simple question that you still haven't answered. I made no mention of financial values or aesthetic value. I simply ask "which print would you buy"? You can put what ever value your little heart desires on either Adams print just answer the question and please not with a question or another scenario. I can answer your question in three words or less and will be happy to if you can do the same. So which would it be the original or the inkjet? And I'll even through in the digital file and you can print a 100,000 of them if you like.

[robert_4927]

Sorry about that...that should have read...." I'll even throw in the digital file------"

[tim atherton]

Robert

you try a very simple trick - set up a straw man so you can knock it down.

Ansel Adams didn't make ink prints - but if he did, I'd buy whichever one looked better.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I would go for the real photograph, not the fake one.

The ironic thing is that those doing ink jet prints who belittle the process are more chained to the process than we are. Thanks to staining developers like Pyrocat, I can print in pt/pd, silver, real carbon, gum bichromate, Kallitypes, Van Dyke all from the same negative. Having controlled the process so that I know what I will get I have at least a dozen processes I can use. Ink jet printers are stuck with ink jet machines and photoshop or at best Photoshop and some of the color printing machines.....makes you wonder how come the "final product is what matters?" I guess this is why we have "platinum toned chromira" or "platinum glicèe" It would be too much to ask you guys learned how to do and master the real thing....

Those of you doing color, if you get a chance when you are visiting a gallery, ask to see a real tricolor carbon print, you will see what real color work should be like.

[Paddy Quinn]

"Paul, wake up. Kirk was using a few sales in Chicago to somehow justify "the validity of archival ink prints," which I assume means artistic validity. If sales is the overriding measure, then calendar art wins hands down. So does Kirk's assertion make sense to you? It doesn't to me."

Michael,

First, Chicago is one of the major centres of photographic art in the US - alongside New York and LA and the institutions mentioned are major ones for photographic education and Collections. So the staff, curators and professors involved are right there in the middle of contemporary photography and practice.

Secondly when Kirk said "It is clear from a casual survey of friends and colleages that the big debate that is waged in this forum over the validity of archival ink prints (or as Jorge likes to say-inkjet posters) is a complete non-issue in the art photo community here." I took that to obviously mean he was referring to ink prints produced according to current best practices "archival ink prints" was shorthand in the same way as "archival fibre prints" might be shorthand for properly produced, developed, fixed, toned and washed silver gelatin fibre based prints. He wasn't raising the issue of their "archival" nature, rather differentiating in the same way you might differentiate between the aforementioned "archival fibre print" and an RC or R3 lab produced B&W print. Thus; "archival ink print" (say ultrachrome pigment based inks on cotton rag paper) as opposed to a photo run off from your grandmas Canon bubble jet printer using dye inks on photocopy paper.

Thirdly I didn't see the idea of sales per se being the overriding issue, but rather that major collections and curators didn't have an issue with acquiring ("archival"/quality) ink prints. The question of the longevity of such prints just wasn't an issue in consideration in acquiring such work - which is happening in most major institutions from what I see.

[robert_4927]

Jorge, Have you seen what Kenro Izu is doing these days with his Platinum Blues. I think this is a Cyan over Platinum process that he's developed.....some pretty good stuff ( sorry I know this is off topic but then again this topic could use a rest)

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I have not seen his pt/cyan prints, but (and I hope you dont hold this against me) I am not a fan of Izu's printing. The last show I saw of him was in Houston, he was exhibiting his nudes and I think it was before he undertook the sacred places project. I found his prints had very dull highlights, I understand when you are doing 14x17 pt/pd, reprints can get very expensive, but I was dissapointed with his prints. Hopefully I will get a chance to see his new work next year and can revise my opinion.

[robert_4927]

Paddy, At three o'clock this afternoon I had a nice conversation with a lady by the name of Kathy Rienholt. Kathy is a very nice lady with quite an intellect. She also happens to be a conservator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art In NYC. Before you buy into the idea that museums are aggressively "collecting" inkjet portfolios I suggest you pick up the phone and ask them yourself. Then you can sit back and laugh at these post just like I can. You see what amazed her was the difference ( according to Kirk) there was between how the art world in Chicago viewed processes as opposed to how they at the Met view process. Does the Met exhibit inkjets? Of course they do. Do they collect them? Pick up the phone and ask them.

[Alan Babbitt]

It's threads just like this that have doomed photo.net to mediocrity. Kirk, shame on you for starting this troll. Jorge, Jeffrey, paulr, Tim, and the rest of you...why don't you just whip 'em out and see who can pee the farthest, post the results and get on with your lives. Sheesh.