Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,692   Posts: 1,482,413   Online: 674
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Why so many problems with labeling? Isn't that done in arts since ever? Don't people write "oil on canvas" or "oil on wood" if it is oil on canvas, or oil on wood? "Indian Ink drawing" or "charcoal slack" or "pencil"?

    The Italian voice of Wikipedia describe seven different techniques of engraving:
    http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incisione

    I wouldn't be able to detect the difference observing the print, but technique certainly has an interest for those "in the know". And certainly ultimately it's the not the technique that determines the value. But it is not irrelevant information I believe.

    Not a claim of superior quality. It's just a description of the technique used.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  2. #22
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,304
    Images
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    Why so many problems with labeling? Isn't that done in arts since ever? Don't people write "oil on canvas" or "oil on wood" if it is oil on canvas, or oil on wood? "Indian Ink drawing" or "charcoal slack" or "pencil"?
    I agree. If you ever enter a competition, or apply to a juried art festival, you'll need to describe your technique. It's not a relative value judgement. It just helps put the work's creation into context.

  3. #23
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    2,910
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by blansky View Post
    Then and only then do you decide to use some sort of recording device to capture and store it.

    Nobody on earth can do what you just did.
    That's a great thought/observation!

  4. #24
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Diapositivo View Post
    I wouldn't be able to detect the difference observing the print, but technique certainly has an interest for those "in the know". And certainly ultimately it's the not the technique that determines the value. But it is not irrelevant information I believe.

    Not a claim of superior quality. It's just a description of the technique used.
    I agree......since there are so many ways a photograph can be produced, a label to describe the particular technique is informative, if it confuses people, then so be it.

  5. #25
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    476
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Man View Post
    In the “olden days” it wasn’t a problem you called it a silver gelatin print or toned silver gelatin print and every one knew what it was and that it was printed from a film negative.
    Actually, when I first saw the phrase "silver gelatin" referring to an artiste's photograph, I had no idea what that meant. Then I was told that it meant a normal photograph. I was not thrilled with the artiste. I thought that it was pretentious.

    Now, I would say "100% traditional photo-chemical process." Everybody has some inkling that film uses light and chemicals, without computers being involved.

  6. #26
    andy_k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Vancouver BC Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    38
    i don't think there's anything particularly more or less ordinary using silver, versus iron/platinum/palladium/gold/etc. other than their relative cost and popularity. obviously in today's digital age of imagining, all analogue processes are special in their own way.

    in contemporary art colour rules, and the prints are either distinguished "chromogenic print" for C41 or "fine art archival print" (giclee) or "color transparency" or much less commonly "cibachrome." hybrid process and lightjet printing are assumed.
    for black and white contemporary, it's either "lightjet print" or "fine art print."
    these distinctions don't excite me very much to emphasize the wholly analogue nature of production to distinguish work that i (or any of us) may produce.

    so i suggest something simple to understand, and easy to apply to all analogue processes:
    "[process/object description], made by hand with [sensitive metal] and light."

    thus, "B&W photograph, made by hand with silver and light." or "gum print, made by hand with dichromate and light." or "platinotype, made by hand with platinum and light."

    obviously light is essential in capturing a photographic image, but when it is the only medium of informational transfer i feel it takes on a place of privilege in producing the photographic object.

  7. #27
    adelorenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    497
    I am by no means an artist but I just tell people I make darkroom prints and they understand what I am talking about. If it comes off an inkjet I call it an inkjet print.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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