All the better, let's invite him to participate in the discussion here and/or over on the LF Forum.
Good idea. Wanna do the honors?
Well, here is the e mail I sent:
"Recently it came to my attention that you were marketing "Carbon" digital prints. I find this description misleading and deceitful for the following reasons:
The term Carbon print has been used for more than 100 years to denote a print in which pigment is suspended in gelatin and the gelatin is then coated into paper, which then is sensitized to UV light by adding a sensitizer like potassium or ammonium dichromate. These prints can take up to a day to make a single print since they require many processing steps.
The resulting print not only has an ecxeptional durability but the print itself has some relief depending on the final support paper, something I am sure your ink jet prints do not have.
If you were making a digital negative which then was printed with the real carbon process, I would accept your description of "Carbon digital print," but presently your prints are nothing more than ink jet prints using carbon based inks, which is an entirely different thing.
Furthermore, in my research of these inks, be they Ultrachorme, Piezography or MIS it is my beleif that the actual "black" ink is the least stable as it requires dyes to make it "really" black. The grays are more stable as they mostly composed of carbon pigments. So I beleive your description in the web site is also inaccurate. In additon accelerated test are only and indication that the inks could possibly last 100 years, they are not by any means proof that they do so. I beleive you actually were victim of these accelerated test with your RC prints which you had to re make since the claims made of their durability were not real.
As an alternative printer I am dissapointed to see such a fine photographer as yourself using these misleadign marketing tactics to promote something that in and of itself you should not be ashamed of. I am sure they are fine and beautiful prints, but they are not carbon prints by any means.
Furthermore, I hope that any of your collectors does not come across a real carbon print, since he/she will notice the difference and will understandably be upset, perhaps demanding a real carbon print or a refund of their money. "
So why dont you invite him David, I dont want to make a nuisance of myself
Nice Jorge. I sent a follow up to their response but they have not sent any following emails. If they do, I will certainly post them here. I, too, am disappointed in Clyde's disregard for the truth and fair marketing practices. He seems as clueless now as when he was caught using RC papers.
Okay, here's my letter. Let's see if he turns up:
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 13:41:03 -0500 (EST)
From: David Goldfarb <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Digital "Carbon Prints"
Dear Mr. Butcher,
Two lively discussions are going on about your use of the term "Carbon
Print" to describe the digital prints you are marketing through your
website. Most of the participants, I would say, are admirers of your work
and have no objection per se to the process itself, but find the
endorsement of terms like this which have traditionally referred to older
processes (other examples being "Digital Platinum Giclee" and "Selenium
Ink Prints") by someone of your stature to be disturbing. While it is
clear from your website that these are not traditional carbon prints, the
terminology suggests that they are in some way a substitute for a
traditional process that is much more laborious and costly.
I would like to invite you to participate in these discussions at the
following two sites:
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Well, here's a very quick acknowledgment:
Thank you for letting us know. We are aware of the situation and trying
to correct the situation. We do not want to be known for false info. We
strive so hard to be honest and true. Thank you for taking the time to
communicate. Any questions or concerns please let me know. Denise
Well I did not get a response and from the one David got, seems they are hoping this thing will blow over. Ah well, I guess all we can do is make people aware.
There's a 1909 book on carbon printing on Ebay now, if you hurry... Anyone?
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Has that page been revised? Looks like it to me--
There is still (at least at this particular moment) a reference to "the archival carbon print" in the text, but that image of Butcher cloning out that little cloud is gone, and the headline clearly states "ink jet."
Yeah looks like it to me. I just dashed off an email thanking everyone there for doing the right thing. Maybe they just did not understand after all and weren't trying to be deceitful after all. It is a done deal in my estimation.