Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/17

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: dry & wet darkroom :-()-:
From: Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 18:13:48 -0400
References: <5.0.0.25.2.20001017160349.0206ad10@127.0.0.1>

At 05:51 PM 10/17/00 -0400, you wrote:

>It all depends, of course, of the final use.  But if I was going to produce
>prints for mounting and display, I would go with (a higher priced)
>traditional silver-gelatin print.  Ink-jets are a great learning tool, a
>good way of (relatively) quickly putting together a portfolio for display or
>to send to someone, but if the final use is museum display (or the
>equivalent, even if not in a museum) silver-gelatin is the way to go.  And I
>consider charging the same amount for piezography (or more!) to be an odd
>practice.
>
>M.

Martin -

Well, it works for me and evidently for most of the members of the 
piezography list.  Have you seen a piezography print?
It's nothing like a plain inkjet print.  As for individually different 
prints, I can choose between hundreds of different papers and an infinite 
number of subtle and dramatic differences in printing techniques.  It's 
possible to make identical prints, if you want to; but it's possible to 
make identical prints in the darkroom, too, if you are careful.  I hope 
that people who buy my prints are buying them for the image and not the 
paper or printing technique.  With piezography,  the image comes closer to 
what I saw when I pressed the shutter.  I'm not charging for the process, 
I'm charging for the image.

Tina

Replies: Reply from Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net> (Re: [Leica] Re: dry & wet darkroom :-()-:)
In reply to: Message from Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net> (RE: [Leica] Re: dry & wet darkroom :-()-:)