Black & White Magazine (US)

Discussion in 'Book, Magazine, Gallery Reviews, Shows & Contests' started by david b, Sep 3, 2004.

  1. david b

    david b Member

    Messages:
    4,031
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Location:
    None of your
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    In the new October 2004 issue of B&W, the editor writes about their new "digital technology in the darkroom policy".

    In short, they will accept work produced by "hybrid" methods as long as the photographer has traditional photographs for sale.

    So they will accept work as long as the photographer is "producing a conventional print and preserving the handcrafted process".

    Just thought this was interesting see we had this discussion a month or so ago.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 3, 2004
  2. mark

    mark Member

    Messages:
    5,264
    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Good news.
     
  3. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,946
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Good to see we have some consensus on this issue between APUG and _B&W_.
     
  4. Jorge

    Jorge Inactive

    Messages:
    4,532
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Sad, but I guess inevitable.
     
  5. Joe Lipka

    Joe Lipka Member

    Messages:
    809
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2002
    Location:
    Cary, North
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Yes, but are they going to have "hybrid" photos in a special section, like our hybrid forum in APUG? :D
     
  6. James Bleifus

    James Bleifus Member

    Messages:
    255
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Location:
    Sonoma Count
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I read it a little differently. The photographer needs to capture the image on film AND print using conventional paper, like Huntington Witherill does. So just using conventional paper isn't enough. I don't know that splitting those hairs means much to me but it seems important to many people.

    Cheers,

    James
     
  7. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,946
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    In the gallery and museum world, an object is usually described by the materials of which the final product is made--"C-print," "Gelatin Silver Print," "Albumen Print," "Oil on Canvas," etc. So I think _B&W_'s refinement of its policy makes a certain amount of sense, being mainly a magazine for collectors. There may be intermediate steps that are digital, but the product that the collector purchases is still a C-print, Gelatin Silver print, Albumen print, etc.
     
  8. Sean

    Sean Admin Staff Member Admin

    Messages:
    9,299
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Shouldn't it be listed as a "digital c-print" and not just a "c-print"? This is what annoys me, the digital camp gets free reign over ALL of our traditional processes, and can pass off all their hybrid work as 100% traditional work -very convenient..

    I have not read the item in question though so may be misinterpreting this discussion about it..

    Personally, I would like to know if a print is a c-print made digitally or a c-print made with traditional methods before I fork over the cash.
     
  9. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    17,946
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I agree. LightJets and Chromiras have a different texture than conventional C-prints--better in some ways, and in some ways not. That said, as an artifact, they both have the same physical properties. It's a different issue than, say, "Platinum Giclee" or "Selenium Ink" or "Pigment Prints" that are really inkjets.
     
  10. James Bleifus

    James Bleifus Member

    Messages:
    255
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Location:
    Sonoma Count
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    B&W usually does a good job describing the printing process used (at least in their articles. Ads are a different thing, and, looking back to when I was shooting digital, I wish I'd described my prints as "digital silver gelatin" though everyone who owns one of my prints also knows my process). In previous articles where B&W has featured work that was available both traditionally and digitally, such as the Al Satterwhite article in the August 2003 issue, they've made it a point to denoting which process is available with which prints. I'd be surprised if they stopped disclosing the photographer's approach. Of course, they're relying on the photographer being forthcoming about his/her process. . .

    Cheers,

    James
     
  11. Aggie

    Aggie Member

    Messages:
    4,925
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Location:
    So. Utah
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You did the correct thing by not calling a digital print a digital silver gelatin print. there is no gelatin or silver in a digital print. It may be a print that started using a negative, you have not qualified that. If it was just for a marketing tool, by saying it was a silver gelatin PRINT when it was digital is wrong. It is misleading.
     
  12. James Bleifus

    James Bleifus Member

    Messages:
    255
    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Location:
    Sonoma Count
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Ah, I should have explained it better in my post. I was making (and still make for a few of my old images) silver prints from a digital neg which was captured digitally. So maybe I should have said "digital hybrid silver gelatin print" or something along those lines.

    As for the marketing, I'm always straight forward in telling people my processes. Life's too short to be deceitful.

    Cheers,

    James
     
  13. Aggie

    Aggie Member

    Messages:
    4,925
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Location:
    So. Utah
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Good for you James. I hate this medium sometimes. The internet just doesn't allow the full meaning of your words without the face to face with the person making the statements. Then other times it does a very good job.