Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,923   Posts: 1,584,985   Online: 1113
      
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 51 to 54 of 54
  1. #51
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,845
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by bill spears View Post
    Yes, but this doesn't mean there isn't another neg the same ..??
    We all often bracket exposures etc ??
    In my type of photography, there are no two negatives the same.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  2. #52
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,784
    Chopping up or burning negatives to prove or enforce the artificial rarity of a limited edition is to my thinking a bit pretentious, or at the very least affected, it won't reap the kind of whirlwind that would befall one who played overt games such as printing "new" editions from an identical negative. The market would take care of game in about two seconds.

  3. #53
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,845
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by JBrunner View Post
    Chopping up or burning negatives to prove or enforce the artificial rarity of a limited edition is to my thinking a bit pretentious, or at the very least affected, it won't reap the kind of whirlwind that would befall one who played overt games such as printing "new" editions from an identical negative. The market would take care of game in about two seconds.
    Totally agree, but the point was:

    If one want's to use 'limited' editions to increase subjective print value, then go the whole way, and destroy the negative, otherwise, there is too much doubt in the truthfulness of the whole approach. For this reason, and sparked by this conversation and the article by Brooks Jensen of Lenswork, I'm giving up on limited editions. I don't believe it's honest enough without destroying the negative, and I'm not prepared to do that. There is too much blood, sweat and tears in them. I', picking up on Brooks proposal and go with numbered editions instead. 1/250 is pretentious (and only wishful thinking) to me!
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  4. #54
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,784
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    Totally agree, but the point was:

    If one want's to use 'limited' editions to increase subjective print value, then go the whole way, and destroy the negative, otherwise, there is too much doubt in the truthfulness of the whole approach. For this reason, and sparked by this conversation and the article by Brooks Jensen of Lenswork, I'm giving up on limited editions. I don't believe it's honest enough without destroying the negative, and I'm not prepared to do that. There is too much blood, sweat and tears in them. I', picking up on Brooks proposal and go with numbered editions instead. 1/250 is pretentious (and only wishful thinking) to me!
    Totally hear you. I read Brooks article, and agree with the principle, but I have found I can sell 10/10 LE pretty easy (relative-print sales are not easy) compared to the response I get from open editions at the same or even at a lower price. A game it is, but enough people are bought in to it that it is a factor for serious consideration, even though it is silly when you step back.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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