Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Gallery Digital Prints?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    Though I strickly shoot 4X5 and some medium format negative film for my gallery images, often ponder if and how soon digital archival prints will be accepted on the level of continuous tone images. My studio friends obviously are in a different situation, at least in dealing with the change over sooner. Will galleries always separate the two? How much can I depend upon my love of film. Sometimes love only cannot pay the rent, but certainly willing to sacrifice the pain of being late. Any comments or sources o

  2. #2
    Founder QT Luong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1997
    San Jose, CA

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    I am not sure I understand the question. Do you mean prints from digital files, or prints made using a digital process ? While the "analog" folks say their prints are "hand made", in the end, it's the result which matters. In color, I see a lot of digital prints in art galleries. B&W is another matter.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Feb 1999

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    Easy Killer.i think You read a little to much into Q`s statement.-J

  4. #4

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    Galen Rowell prints all his work from digital files. They surely are gallery quality prints. Some of them are giclee prints, some onto the Fuji Crystal Archive, and some on Fujix, but all are printed from a digital file. Some of the previous posters express contempt for this idea.

    There's nothing wrong with scanning film to digital and then making a print. What's wrong is modifying it in a way that's not true to the original piece of film, and then failing to include that information. Any process that faithfully reproduces what's on film is legitimate.

    In the comparisons I saw of conventional high quality wet print against a LightJet Fuji Crystal Archive print (from a digital file), the digital print was superior in every way and was more faithful to the original. There was just no comparison.

    I have a 30 X 40 print from Galen in my office, and it holds up extremely well in that size--something near-impossible from a conventional print at that size.

    I think the people who complain about new technologies that can do things better would prefer to buy CD ROMs that have tape hiss on them.

  5. #5

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    there are no archival digital printing processes that i am aware of for color work - the best available seems to be the crystal archive paper by fuji, and it is stable for about 60 years according to what i have read (though some testers are claiming up to 150 years). if your goal is to produce archival-quality work (500+ years), you still must work in the essentially classical mode of b/w, with fiber-based paper and archival processing techniques. if all you want is very high quality prints of your color work, digital printing is certainly capable of that. i no longer use conventional color printing techniques at all - all of my LF CT work is scanned and printed at a local digital imaging house. the prints i get from this method are visually superior to the hand-made color prints from the same CTs, and it takes extremely close examination with a loupe to tell the difference between which image comprises grain structure and which comprises pixels.

    if you are talking about replacing your film-based camera with a digital camera to make your images, i would say you are jumping the gun by about 2-3 years. the mega-pixel cameras of today (~3mb file size) render pretty good images up to around 8x10 size, but start losing the contest with film at larger print sizes. however, technology is rapidly improving, and within 3 years, you will see digital cameras that can generate 150-200mb files that should be able to render visually satisfying prints up to about 16x20. archival storage of digital image files is not yet a possibility (that i know of), and i dont know how they will solve that problem. i imagine, though, that the gold CD-type discs that NASA creates to send on interstellar spacecraft are pretty darn stable...

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2000

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    The eventual outcome will be the same as when someone "paints" a painting on the computer, then tries to pawn it off as original art work. It might work at the swap meet, but a gallery will have a different view of it. This is especially true when other people actually bring in work that is created by hand. The computer is the east way out, the "fake" way of creating anything. If you want to make yourself look like you are playing with art instead of being serious, just stick with the computer.

  7. #7

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    In all due respect to Josh Slocum (are you still single handing?) Digital manipulation, which I still have to learn, is still lab work, only in a computer, not wet. It still takes skill to do it and you will not get a good product from crap images. THe skill needed to make a photo is still needed. We will, almost all, make the jump to digital in some form. Why whine about it. Just use it. It is still just a tool. WE use tools, or as I prefer instruments, to produce our work. How we get there has been constantly changing, otherwise we would still be carting our photo equipment in wagons and using flash powder. Each step in technology has been accompanied with complaints about it not being good,or fast, or causing those who use it not to learn quality. Not so, the good ones learn, the bad may have it easier, but they willnot succeed, so why worry.

  8. #8

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    I'm really surprised that, because my opinion represents a minority viewpoint, that you all feel the need to resort to personal attacks. Thanks, very much.

  9. #9

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    Steve: Read my post again, then recritique. If you'll notice, I talked about working conditions and learning situations more than I did about how "essentially" bad digital may or may not be. Is that not clear? If you don't like the fact that I point out some of the differences of digital as it relates to a photographer's development, I'm sorry. Please, however, respond to something I actually said, rather than telling me "not to whine." That's the answer people give when they mean "give into it because it's popular; don't have your own opinion." No thanks, Mr. Bein.

  10. #10

    Gallery Digital Prints?

    I welcome the computer era. I've seen what digitally made negs can do. Beautiful work. I've seen J.P. Caponigro's digital work. Superb. I use to fight the digital/silver wars. Not any more. The two are very compatible and complimentary. Both bring different uses and outcomes to the photographic table. When I cruise through the Galleries in LA and Carmel, I am amazed at what photographers are doing with digital. From creating works wholly by computer and a marriage of the two. But I am most taken by both digital negatives and digitally enlarged negatives, and how much the medium offers. I don't "want" that damned power line in the image. And no, spotting is not the answer. I "want" a black sky in the image, not a grey sky. If I can make a better image by digital manipulation then I will use that strategy. What rule or law says I have to do these things the "traditional" way. None. And none of us are the arbiters of this struggle. The pictorialists were struggling the same way when AA and Cunnigham and company came along with f64 and their sharpness counts in technique and ideas. Many times it takes more creativity and pure manhours to make a digital creation. Or to manipulate the elements within an image. So when I hear the fight song of the purists, I turn my back. It is a stupid fight. If an image is good, that in itself is the reward to both the maker and spectator. James

Similar Threads

  1. Cibachrome vs Digital Prints
    By Robert Jaques in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 24-Sep-2012, 13:41
  2. handmade digital prints
    By adrian tyler in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 17-Jan-2006, 11:24
  3. Fiber Prints from Digital Files
    By Scott Watts in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 30-Aug-2004, 09:46
  4. Digital prints -- what paper do you use?
    By Leigh Perry in forum Business
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 24-Nov-2003, 13:06
  5. LARGE digital prints???
    By Gary Albertson in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 15-Oct-2001, 19:43


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts