Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,199   Posts: 1,531,467   Online: 856
      
Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 8121314151617181920212223 LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 228
  1. #171

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,037
    Quote Originally Posted by elekm View Post
    I recently came across a box of photos that my parents took years ago. It made me wonder if we'll have anything to leave for our future generations. I hope so. Or maybe it won't matter.

    I suppose there will be photo CDs and DVDs that will still be readable. Or not. And perhaps we'll come across a hard drive that is full of images. If you notice, they aren't even called photos, but images. Maybe it's the same thing. Maybe it isn't.
    I scatter inkjet prints and true photographs in all my photo albums. It will be really interesting in my afterlife, as a ghost, poltergeist, or other spirit entity, to watch over the children as they turn the pages of those musty volumes...

    "Good god, look how badly THIS one faded."

    "Yeah, gramps probably used bad ink on some of them. Maybe it's the paper."

    "This one looks great!" Flipping a couple prints over. "Who is this Kodak company? And this one, 'Fuji Crystal Archive' eh? That one REALLY holds its inks!"

    The *might* figure out that some are photos and some are inkjets. Who knows? The inkjets may be the ones that last! I do wonder if they'll keep or even want the negatives I have stored all the years. Probably headed for the dustbin.
    In life you only get one great dog, one great car, and one great woman. Pet the dog. Drive the car. Make love to the woman. Don't mix them up.

  2. #172
    Prest_400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    534
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfeye View Post
    I scatter inkjet prints and true photographs in all my photo albums. It will be really interesting in my afterlife, as a ghost, poltergeist, or other spirit entity, to watch over the children as they turn the pages of those musty volumes...

    "Good god, look how badly THIS one faded."

    "Yeah, gramps probably used bad ink on some of them. Maybe it's the paper."

    "This one looks great!" Flipping a couple prints over. "Who is this Kodak company? And this one, 'Fuji Crystal Archive' eh? That one REALLY holds its inks!"

    The *might* figure out that some are photos and some are inkjets. Who knows? The inkjets may be the ones that last! I do wonder if they'll keep or even want the negatives I have stored all the years. Probably headed for the dustbin.
    Who knows, you might have a descendent relative who is interested in the collection. I have a small family collection ald like to see how each paper has held up.
    I think pigment inkjet printing seems promising. But, recalling PE. There are very fade resistant dyes and not very lasting pigments...

    Meanwhile, in the audio recording industry:
    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-57...g-analog-tape/
    Magnetic tape as a futureproof medium.

  3. #173

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,182
    No, it's only good for photographs.
    Anyone can make a Digital print, but only a photographer can make a photograph.

  4. #174
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,050
    Digital storage and cloud storage is every bit as bad as I predicted. In fact even worse. Viva la film!
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  5. #175

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    35
    About 1 1/2 years ago my 40 year old son learned that a woman that lived in his neighborhood had been our neighbor when he was about two years old. The lady was within a year or two of my sons age. He learned that her brother of about 1 year younger had passed away at the age of 19 due to an extremely rare disease and that their mother had hardly any pictures of them as young children since the parents divorced at the girls age of 3 and the father took most of the pictures with him and has refused to share since. It took me about 1/2 hour to retrieve a B&W negative I had made of the girl and boy sitting together on a "hot wheels" tricycle when I first began doing photography. While the negative was quite poor by my standards now I was able to make several reasonable quality 8X10's on good fiber paper for a Christmas surprise. I learned the mother was in tears when she opened the gift from the daughter at Christmas and she sent me a beautiful "thank you" note. Highly doubt if digital files would have made to almost 40 years so easily!!!

  6. #176
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    741
    Images
    32
    a digital file might not last 40 years...but a modern c-print is also only rated for 40 years...

    comparatively, modern inks in pigment printers, such as the Epson Ultrachrome K3 and HDR inks are based heavily on carbon pigments...

    "but that only applies to certain ink and paper combinations" you might say.

    true. but doesn't that also apply to RC vs. FB? Toned vs. Untoned? Optical brighteners or lack thereof? UV resistant multicoated plexi or just cheap picture frame glass? We have had some inkjet prints of my dad's around the house for the past 3-4 years that were all printed with Ultrachrome K3 inks, that are in broad daylight much of the time, rather abundant in yellow and green hues (acknowledged as being the least stable of ink colors), and they have shown -zero- signs of deterioration, so far, and I doubt they will anytime soon.

    The longevity of any "fine" print is far more dependent on the materials used to display it, in most cases, than the materials used to actually produce the print. I have no doubt that my archivally fixed and toned bw fiber prints, matted behind acid/lignin free 8ply mats with archival backing board and hinge mounted with linen tape will last a very, very long time...I also don't doubt that an inkjet print made with a paper such as Epson Exhibition Fiber or Museo Silver Rag and K3 or Ultrachrome inks presented in much the same way will also last an extraordinarily long time.

    How many people actually work to such exacting archival standards? Not many...not many...

    Nb. I find it extraordinarily humorous that this board often disparages inkjet printing, and yet people complain just as much about their old chromes fading constantly...or that color negatives deteriorate...

    As to the file format viability argument, the TIF file format standard has existed since the 1980s...last I heard that was still the standard format for most digital printing applications...
    Last edited by Chris Lange; 09-26-2013 at 12:39 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  7. #177
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    741
    Images
    32
    I find that most people who complain about their digital prints lacking the same quality as a darkroom print are not following as rigorous a workflow as they might follow for their wet prints.

    An Epson V700 and an un-profiled entry level inkjet printer cannot, and will never deliver the same quality that a well maintained enlarger with a great lens, "good" negatives, and proper processing is capable of. On the other hand, a great digital camera or dedicated film scanner such as the Nikon 9000 or Minolta Multi-Pro, or Imacon with the proper holders and good scanning technique, followed by meticulous treatment of the file, and printed on a device such as the Epson -900 series printers is very capable of matching the technical quality of even the best darkroom equipment...or outdoing it in some cases.

    not much difference for me between these two places...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	photo 1.JPG 
Views:	71 
Size:	95.8 KB 
ID:	74747
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	photo 2.JPG 
Views:	69 
Size:	73.5 KB 
ID:	74748
    Last edited by Chris Lange; 09-26-2013 at 01:03 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  8. #178
    Shawn Dougherty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,132
    Images
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lange View Post
    not much difference for me between these two places...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	photo 1.JPG 
Views:	71 
Size:	95.8 KB 
ID:	74747
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	photo 2.JPG 
Views:	69 
Size:	73.5 KB 
ID:	74748
    There is a HUGE difference for me. That difference has nothing to do with quality or print longevity. The difference resides in my heart and in a peace of mind. I work on computers at my job and in varying aspects of my life, almost everyday. When it comes time to make art I want to get my hands dirty and I don't want to have a computer anywhere near me. Just like many painters who choose to use traditional materials rather than a tablet, software and an inkjet printer...

    The process MAY not be important to the viewer but it CAN be integral to the artist.


  9. #179
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    741
    Images
    32
    I agree completely, Shawn

    The difference for me is that I dislike working in communal darkrooms, and I dislike working on a workstation in a computer lab, or in an office cubicle environment.

    The importance of environment in my creative process is more towards my surroundings being geared for the kind of work I'm doing. Good daylight, work up on the walls, a good cup of coffee or a cold beer and fresh air...no fluorescent lights...a comfortable chair. I know there are certain prints I can make only in the darkroom (anything dealing with toning and bleach...which I use quite a lot), and I know there are prints I would only use a digital output for (anything color...among other certain b/w purposes.)

    I don't think one is inherently better than the other, that's all. Different, sure, but used in tandem effectively are capable of just about anything you might want.

    There's never in any harm in being well-versed with as many different ways to realize your work as possible... is there?
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  10. #180
    Shawn Dougherty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,132
    Images
    289
    I agree completely about environment and also that neither is inherently better on it's own. It's how process jives with the individual that can make a huge difference. For me and my creativity, darkroom work is better. But I can't stress enough that it's my personal experience and perspective that make it so.

    Now as to beer and coffee, well, how could anyone do without those?! =P
    Last edited by Shawn Dougherty; 09-26-2013 at 03:34 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Clarity which so often comes from bevity...



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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