Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,042   Posts: 1,560,763   Online: 1119
      
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 128
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    If a person made, for instance, still life photos that were easy to print snd could be printed at 50 at a time with a good chance of selling them all then perhaps one could make money selling 8x10 prints ar $20.00. I find that more refreshing than photographers offering an 8x10 at $250.00 that is mundane and poorly crafted.
    Claire (Ms Anne Thrope is in the darkroom)

  2. #52
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,190
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by jdef
    Is there any substantial difference in the quality of reproduction of the images in Lenswork compared to the images you offer for $20 ea.?
    In my opinion, the ones in the magazine are better quality. Lenswork has consistently the highest quality reproductions of any photographic periodical out there.

  3. #53
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,406
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    155
    I'd be happy with $20 for an image that originated digitally and was output by pushing a button on a computer. Hell I can get posters in the poster shop for $17 that are 17X24, so $20 is probably high.

    OTOH my pictures may only be worth $20 but I'll be damned if I'll sell them for that! I'll give them away until they're "worth" what my time and talent is really worth.
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  4. #54
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Claire Senft
    I find that more refreshing than photographers offering an 8x10 at $250.00 that is mundane and poorly crafted.
    You mean like Joel Meyerowitz and his images of Tuscany?
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  5. #55
    MurrayMinchin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Coast, BC, Canada
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    4,196
    Images
    15
    This will be a gross over simplification

    It's all Ansel's fault. Edward was happy enough working to clarify his vision, and only needed enough money for food, a roof over his head, materials, and to keep the vehicle going. Ansel hired a publicist and made himself famous. Ansel also announced that he would stop making prints from old negatives when he turned 70, and sold (I think) $1,000,000.00 worth in the 2 years before he retired.

    Collectors who had picked up prints for next to nothing began to sell them off. Edward was gone and Ansel wasn't going to make anymore, so the prices started to climb. Galleries started popping up everywhere as the greedy bellied up to the trough. Buyers were equally greedy and snapped up overpriced work by new artists because they appeared to be good investments, and the inflated price was quite a bit less than what Edward's and Ansel's stuff was now going for. This has continued unchecked. This is what happens when people buy art not because they love it, but for its investment potential.

    There are honourable photographers and reputable gallery owners out there, but when there's so much money to be had, it's like emptying a chum bucket off the back of the boat.

    Murray

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    85
    Quote Originally Posted by roteague
    when I see an entire issue devoted to people using digital technologies, it leaves a lasting impression that your magazine doesn't care about the traditional photographer.
    Which issue are you referring to? The current issue, LensWork #62, features photographs from four photographers:
    • Richard Snodgrass (4x5 film camera)
    • Fritz Liedtke (4x5 Polaroid Pos/Neg film)
    • Huntington Witherill (Med format film and digital cameras)
    • Stewart Harvey (Widelux printed on gelatin silver)


    Yes, even though Richard used a 4x5 film camera, he did digital prints as does Huntington, but the other two used film cameras and gelatin silver for their prints. Must we only publish photographers who've sworn off all forms of digital technology to gain your approval? Is it possible that your observation is a bit of a reflection of what you choose to see?

    I've recapped our statistics in other threads and over the last 5 years we've published an overwhelming majority of silver work -- in fact, almost to the exclusion of digital. I'm almost surprised I don't get more complaints from the digital folks because we publish so little that is digital!

    I've stated this before, but it's worth saying again. We never look at the equipment that is being used when we select content for any of our publications. We only look at the work and try to choose what we think is the best imagery. Quite honestly, most of the best work is still on film because (IMHO, but I have no facts to back this up) large and medium format photographers tend to be the ones most concerned with image quality and the fine print. (I know this is a generalization, but it's my observation.) They are the ones most dedicated to making fine art photographs. (I guess I've just laid myself open to criticism from a whole bunch of 35mm users!) I have no crystal ball, so I have no idea what the future holds, but today this is still true and is reflected in what we choose to publish.

    So, please feel free to disagree with me about my philosophies and opinions -- lots to discuss! -- but let's do so with the facts when it concerns what we do and do not publish in LensWork. Is this a fair request?

    Brooks Jensen
    Editor, LensWork Publishing
    Written Thursday January 12, 2006

  7. #57
    jovo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,087
    Images
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by lenswork
    I've stated this before, but it's worth saying again. We never look at the equipment that is being used when we select content for any of our publications. We only look at the work and try to choose what we think is the best imagery.
    I confess that I always look at the equipment used for the portfolios and I actually, viscerally feel better when it's not digital. However, much like the way photographs are seen on the web, it makes no difference in the magazine. The reproductions always bear the Lenswork style of clarity and quality with a narrow variety of 'toning' as well. I would never be able to tell, if there were no equipment attributions, whether they were ULF, Minox, film or digital.
    John Voss

    My Blog

  8. #58
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by lenswork
    Yes, even though Richard used a 4x5 film camera, he did digital prints as does Huntington, but the other two used film cameras and gelatin silver for their prints. Must we only publish photographers who've sworn off all forms of digital technology to gain your approval? Is it possible that your observation is a bit of a reflection of what you choose to see?
    I have no problem with you publishing digital photographers (guess what, I print on a Chromira - a digital printer for all my work), the point I was making is that the perception that comes across. Your words and your actions in Lenswork mean a lot more than simple words on the Internet. You see how much your comment about $20 prints has caused in APUG alone? If you were a "pure" traditional photographer you would see how much of photographic publishing is being taken over by digital technologies.

    I'm not a B&W photographer, and that is the very reason I read Lenswork. I realize you don't have time to read all of APUG, but if you did you would realize that I am one of the few arguing for the use of digital printers (like the Lightjet and Chromira) in color photography.

    The whole point of my message is that your words and actions, as the publisher of an influential magazine in the world of B&W photography, have a lot more impact than you realize.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  9. #59
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by MurrayMinchin
    This will be a gross over simplification

    It's all Ansel's fault. Edward was happy enough working to clarify his vision, and only needed enough money for food, a roof over his head, materials, and to keep the vehicle going. Ansel hired a publicist and made himself famous. Ansel also announced that he would stop making prints from old negatives when he turned 70, and sold (I think) $1,000,000.00 worth in the 2 years before he retired. ...


    Murray
    Harrumph.

    Ansel worked his butt off to support his family and leave something to his kids. Like a farmer. Too bad he couldn't sell his dairy quota so he didn't have to drive himself into the ground grinding out prints as his body was shutting down.

    The tough thing about being a photographer, of any kind, is to afford to live next door to a client.

    Adams and Strand talked about the whole issue of price, and how to reach a marketplace. Since both were also commercial shooters ( Strand, a film maker ) the burden of making ends meet was alleviated, a little. Adams believed in the 'democracy' of photography; a negative can make unlimited prints, so he didn't charge a lot for his work.

    Strand saw ( more clearly, I think, than Adams ) that the limit of a photographer to make prints came from exhaustion, that each print was a piece of his 'soul' ( OK, Strand didn't use the word, but I'm too lazy to look up his letter ) and that was part of the process, and it justified a higher price.

    They both agreed the 'high end' market was limited, and incapable of meeting even simple needs. Both turned to gravure and lithography to market fine quality reproductions to the mass market, at an affordable price. As did PH Emerson in the 19th c. when he turned to gravure as an alternative to hand tipped platinotypes in his books.

    Strand paved the way for giclee portfolios at reasonable prices. He was passionate about getting good images into the hands of normal, not rich, people. Adams helped pioneer the current fine lithography and digital scanning to make the images as good as possible.

    So, on one hand they paved the way for affordable portfolios. And on the other, pushed the quality of fine photographic printmaking to new heights.

    They didn't see a devil's choice, and made the best images they could for the different marketplace.

    For what it's worth, Edw worked his tail off keeping body and soul together. The sentimental image of a pure photographer living a noble life is fine, but it misses the cost he paid.
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  10. #60
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Christian- your work is lovely, and I wish you every good success. The way you ( and others ) are using eBay is very good. You can sell as many prints as you can, you are free of galleries ( and their 50% take ) and reach far more people. You are truly helping to develop a market for us all.
    .
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin