« Sunday Support Group: Music at a Higher Level (Off-Topic) (Music Notes) | Main | Open Mike: Sit and Listen (OT) »

Sunday, 17 May 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

That print has a lovely ethereal glow. I find it utterly beguiling. Puts me in mind of the recent Dawson City documentary about unearthed silent movies.

Descriptions of methods of printing are often abreviated, rattled through at pace, or full of hinted at nuances that the uninitiated (me!) find baffling. I would really appreciate a set of diagrams showing the methods/permutations. If they don't already exist I would be happy to create them for you to share. I would of course need someone to provide the relevant info for me to represent.

See, you didn’t need video!

Thanks for that and really informative! I do so agree about a job not done till the print is made especially when the image is in Black and White/ Lovely print from what I can see and the look of the paper texture really helpful.

Thank you! Really liking this new topic.

Apropos of nothing, a lovely collage of Wisconsin photographs from the Atlantic:

I really enjoyed reading that!
A fair subject, a good print, a nicely built critique.
I agree with what you say about the size of the print, but had never really thought about a reason why before.
If a print is too large I didn't notice it. A bit like hotel room pictures.

One way to deal with the dreaded Folded Cardboard is to use two pieces of the same size, but with the corrugation of each running at a right angle to the other. Works for me.

"Pt/Pd prints"?

[Sorry, I should have put the abbreviation in parentheses after the first mention of the term as is proper. That's fixed now. Platinum/palladium. --Mike]

I never quite understood what forensic photography was all about but now I think I can.
Good job.

Nice it reminds me of Strand's 'Time in New England (cover maybe?)'

[This one?


There are others. --Mike]

And that's why I always mail prints in a tube or in a box.

If you really have to use an envelope corrugated cardboard is only strong in one direction. A couple of sheets of foam core work well. I used to work for someone who had a stack of plywood cut to the size that would fit into a flat rate envelope and would stick a piece in the envelope with whatever he sent to the art director.

One of the things editors (like you) used to teach photographers (like me) was to use two pieces of corrugated cardboard for submissions, the trick was to have the two sheets of cardboard at right angles to protect the contents on every axis. I forget which magazine and which editor first put me on to this trick.

This one I find the story somewhat more interesting than the print. But the story is interesting and the print supports it rather than fighting it, to my eye.

(I hardly ever like low-contrast prints including about all platinum/palladium prints I've seen; can't remember exceptions, but I do think I have seen some that I liked.)

And I can imagine this being a lot of fun to think of and do, if I were already working in that sort of process.

It's interesting to see your reaction before you read the artist's notes, and then after. I'm glad you chose to present it that way (I mean, I have to trust you on the order you say you did things, but I'm perfectly happy to do so).

Thanks to Frank Gorga for submitting this print to the public gaze!

Love the concept and backstory. Kudos to Frank Gorga! A video critique would only get in the way... don't think you need it unless you think it would add something... Just matte it tight... the crease seems off the main print area anyway...

Lovely photo. Lovely critique. A lovely bright respite to an otherwise sad day. Thanks to all.

This is a very rich double, or really multiple, performance in a nutshell -- the life-in-photography of the printer/photographer, the camera-lens-printing process, the print itself, and your life-in-photography and commentary on top of that. The effect is of both an ease in execution and a depth of significance that is rare, I think, in so short a space. Huge thanks to both of you!

Because of the way the corrugated cardboard is constructed, two stacked sheets of cardboard, placed at right angles are needed to prevent creases.

Love small, square, elegant B&W photographs such as this! The blurred, low key, minimalist image offsets the sharp lines and enhances the overall dreamlike quality...
Prints - are - Fun!

And video not necessary.

I really enjoyed this. Thanks to you and the photographer for the multi-layered presentation.

Would you comment on the choice of paper for this particular image?
Color cast, surface texture, matte versus semigloss, etc.?



Homage to Paul Strand?

Interesting post, good photo, good way to give a critique.

So I surmised that you liked the print, but you don't really like those types of prints? Is that correct?

[I might discuss the issue of taste vs. judgement more in a future post. I can't communicate everything I know or think about photographs and printing in one short post. --Mike]

Good photo. Good post. Thanks to both of you.

I really enjoyed this first print crit, Mike and really look forward to the whole series!

I love the soft qualities of the print and think it's the type of image that works well printed small. It reminds me of the Luminous Landscape Video Journal in which Michael Reichmann visited daguerreotypist Mike Robinson and they discussed the very personal viewing experience that daguerreotypes effect.

I'm also intrigued by the idea of printing on non inkjet papers. The paper featured with this print is just lovely. I have images in mind that would work well with it and may have to venture outside of the realm of traditional inkjet media!

Always use a Coroplast sandwich when forced to ship via a simple envelope or express package.

Way back on May 5 Mike wrote, "First, I think the best guide to how I'll go about critiquing a print is to wait until I do it."

Right he was. So far it's been much more than I expected ... in a good way.

Mike there is one even more similar, I'll see if I can dig it out.
Good company anyway......

and I said "uh-oh" also ... because that print looks GOOD, and finished, and nice, and I sent you a "work print" and comparing the two, mine sucks.

Nice picture and good write up. There is no need for any video review. This is much better. Thank you.
Single corrugated sheet is bad for print support/protection because the flutes run one way and it can easily bend in one direction while being stiff in the other. Double wall sheet would be a bit better. That’s a corrugated sheet with two flutes and three flat liners, but the flutes still run in same direction. Better still, use two corrugated sheets in 90 degree angle. That gives stiffness in all directions.

George Andros asked "Would you comment on the choice of paper for this particular image?"

I am not sure that I have any strong rationale for why I used Johannot for this particular image.

These days, the large majority of my printing is done on matte paper and most is done on paper that is not specially coated for inkjet printing.

I have found that modern ink sets give respectable results on many papers. I use both Epson's Ultra HD (as used in the P800) and Jon Cone's Piezography Ultra HD inks. (I'm partial to the warm neutral K6 ink set.)

Sure, the Dmax is not as high as it would be on a glossier paper but that is true for matte papers coated for ink jet printing as well.

One needs to process one's image specifically with this type of printing in mind, but it is not difficult. Mainly, images need more mid-tone contrast for printing on uncoated papers.

One of the advantages of this approach is that it opens up an incredible variety of papers on which one can print. I like paper per se and I like to experiment! So I buy lots of different papers and I make prints.

I like Johannot because it is unique... quoting from the Legion web site "Johannot is a mouldmade paper comprised of 75% cotton and 25% esparto. Esparto is a perennial grass grown in Africa and the Iberian Peninsula."

Thus, in addition to its unique texture it has a slightly different feel in hand compared to a 100% cotton paper.

Johannot works particularly well with my camera obscura images which are inherently soft. I'm not sure it would work well with images that have lots of fine detail. The texture tends to conflict with (soften?) fine details.

I hope that this response is useful.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007