[Leica] Does the process matter?

[wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (wildlightphoto@earthlink.net)]

David Rodgers <drodgers@casefarms.com> wrote:

> I was in a gallery the other day. There were two large framed paintings.
> They looked identical to me. One was priced $850. The other $5,000. One
> was the original oil painting. The other was an inkjet copy. The copy
> was on textured paper that made it look like an oil painting. 
>
> I studied the original and copy closely. Again, I couldn't tell a
> difference, though granted know nothing about oil painting. But there
> obviously was a difference in value. I'm not sure how, or even if this
> relates to silver vs an inkjet printing. But it does remind me value
> isn't always based on aesthetics. Methods and materials are important.  
>
> I also recall being in a gallery in Carmel years ago. There was a large
> bw print. It was a "giclee" print, somewhat rare at the time. The
> gallery was hyping that and it was expensive. Now silver prints are
> becoming the rarity. I don't want to read too much into that. But is
> aesthetics the only thing that's important, or does the process matter? 

The perception of scarcity is what drives the difference in price, whatever
the process is.  Years ago "giclee" was scarce, expensive to produce, and
given the often cantankerous Iris printers, not easy to reproduce.  Inkjet
printing is now commonplace, relatively inexpensive, and easily reproduced.
Much bigger supply leading to lower pricing.

Doug Herr
Sacramento
http://www.wildlightphoto.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com ? Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft?
Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail