For this exercise I would like all to assume that the content of the prints we are discussing are not in question, in other words, whatever the print is, the vision and execution are clear and true to the intent, so we can avoid the super lame "content is king" diversion.
That users of these process that will come to be mentioned are in firm control of the intent of their compositions needs to be taken for granted. I would like to ignore ridiculous assertions such as "platinum printers use platinum process because they think it makes their prints more valuable" That may be true in certain cases, however the expense of undertaking that process mitigates a lot of the "increased value" assertion, and that relationship is seldom mentioned.
My questions here concern the print as an artifact, and the relationship you as a printer have with both the process and the print.
I would be interested to know from actual users why they feel drawn to certain processes. What is it about the process or artifact of the process (print) that draws you to it?
Why is Sandy King currently making mostly carbon prints, as he has the expertise to print in any medium?
Why collodion? Large format contact prints on silver paper? Platinum? Gum over? Bromoil? etc.?
How do the results of your chosen process fit into your vision?
__________________
--J Brunner, The Prints of Darkness
I suspect that a major factor in the decisions of which process to use is associated with its intrinsic novelty & individuality. I think this is why alt processes are now gaining so much traction in this age of perfect facsimile.
Consider the extreme case of a digital file, which is a 100%-replicable record and thus lacks the inherently proprietary / individual nature of a negative (I would argue). But through alt processes, folks find a way to generate individual output even from that... replete with wonderful "processing artifacts" that I think do greatly increase the value of the print. Even for traditional prints from negs or chromes, certain processes are more likely to create distinctly characteristic prints that intimately reflect the handcraft of the printer.
Not to make this sound only about sales, but I think the market value of a print is closely linked to its individuality and inversely proportional to the number of identical copies that can be produced.
That is my current thinking on process- it's all about creating prints that are individual and which reflect something about how I work and think.
I've come to like a lot of things about albumen printing.
It's a contact printing process, and I like the detail albumen can render from an original camera negative, as opposed to less glossy contact processes. But it's not quite as glossy as air dried glossy fiber silver gelatin paper, so it has it's own look.
It is a printing out process, so it is self-masking, making it great for landscapes with modern panchromatic films in a way that didn't matter for the orthochromatic plates that were the norm in the age of albumen printing.
The process of albumenizing paper, until it is sensitized, can be done with common ingredients that are non-toxic and can be handled in the same vessels that I use in the kitchen. I like to cook, so there's something satisfying about making albumen paper with egg whites, and being able to use the yolks for pastry, custard, ice cream, bernaise sauce and other things.
The print is a handmade thing that's best seen in person and is something that most people haven't seen, or aren't aware that they've seen. I usually have a small album of albumen prints in my camera bag that I'll show people who ask about my large format camera. Most people probably have seen an albumen print without being aware of it, so when I explain albumen printing to people, there is often a sense of recognition and of seeing something new at the same time.
Interesting questions are raised when the craft of the process becomes more important than the image content and message.
Ian
Actually, I would assert that the discussion becomes mundane when persons assume that a discussion of process relegates subject , content , and intent to the trash heap. The first two paragraphs of the OP address this. Assuming the content and message are well crafted should be taken for granted. We can't convey content and message without a medium. There isn't much way to get by a crappy photograph printed in any medium, and I think everybody realizes that.
A chosen process coupled with the mastery of craft undertaken by a competent photographer has a direct effect on the of content and message of the image when it is rendered as a print. The same negative rendered as an inkjet, platinum, silver, or something else print will result in that many prints, each with its own characteristics, and although the nuances might be lost on some, those particular people have plenty of reality television to catch up on, if they aren't out for a night at the bar with their wife's sister.. I'm interested in knowing why people choose a particular process and how that process fits into their vision.
__________________
--J Brunner, The Prints of Darkness
The process in some ways influences the kinds of subjects one shoots and the kind of lighting one looks for. Albumen + modern film can render some subjects that are hard to render in other ways. Some subjects look good in platinum or photogravure or carbon or cyanotype or some other medium. There is a constant feedback loop, so the process matters. The materiality of the artifact is part of the content.
OK, fair point Jason, you did address the issue I raised in a roundabout way, and I deliberately didn't go into further discussion, but the balance is fine.
Perhaps it's a shame that Jorge Gasteazoro is no longer a member of this forum, (he has also given up photography), because his work was an excellent example of matching craft and content with his superb Platinum prints.
I contact print on silver paper because of its simplicity. My favorite part of photographing is the seeing and the act. Developing film and making prints sometimes seems like a chore. I prefer the most simple method to satisfying prints, which for me is contacting on silver.
J, interesting question to pose.
As each of the respective response will be individually relative, Ill answer from exactly only there.
I've personally gone through alot of steps in my, albeit short, photographic history. I've settled on what I feel is most fitting for me. 12x20 shooting and platinum/palladium and gum bichromate over platinum/palladium contact printing. I think the main reason for this is a purely selfish one, its what feels right for me. I enjoy every single step of the process. I get personal satisfaction and an immense level of enjoyment out of every single step of the process:
from loading film into the holders
to hauling around the camera
to being limited to the small number of holders I have
to setting up the camera
to exposing film
to developing the big negs
to coating a sheet of paper
to exposing the coated paper
to processing the print
to spotting the print
to holding that finished print in my hands and experiencing it in it's final form
(add in the multiple steps of doing gum layers on top and the list grows longer)
Of all the processes I've experimented with, the ones I have settled on are the ones I feel most effectively and successfully express what it is that I see, not to mention they are understandable and tangible in my mind. Some may say complicated, but in all actuality, they possess a great sense of simplicity and a measurable and graspable sense of beauty. The steps and processes I explored previously always seemed to contain some or many step(s) that were less than enjoyable or that I even down right hated (silver printing and the steps that encompass it, are loathesome to go through, for me personally). I think that is the biggest and most prominent reason for choosing to do the processes that I do. They have given me a sense of balance in life. I have spent, and continue to spend, a large segment of my life behind a computer screen dealing with the 0s and 1s of everyday work and life, the photographic work I do is a balance. It seems to afford me the ability to balance on that razors edge of sanity and happiness.
Maybe it all boils down to the main reason being a completely and entirely selfish one.
The artifact of process. 
Linear Mode
