are black and white photographers vain, all this talk about archival image making

michr · Jun 19, 2018

Sirius Glass said:
That is a fabrication of the digital world. I am concerned about archival properties because I want my work to be done properly and last a long time in frames or photographic albums. Please do not inflict your insecurities on me!

How is that a fabrication?

Patrick Robert James · Jun 19, 2018

Digital images are not archival. If you think they are, you are smokin' some whacky stuff. The big problem of course is when the original corrupts and in turn the backups get corrupted. I love all the "theoretically" mumbo jumbo. This is what happens in the real world to everything digital eventually.

faberryman · Jun 19, 2018

Interesting. Can you explain the circumstances under which the image on the left became the image of the right?

michr · Jun 19, 2018

Patrick Robert James said:
Digital images are not archival. If you think they are, you are smokin' some whacky stuff. The big problem of course is when the original corrupts and in turn the backups get corrupted. I love all the "theoretically" mumbo jumbo. This is what happens in the real world to everything digital eventually.

View attachment 202727

Neat image. Perhaps we need a digital archival format which is uncompressed, and redundant (using some kind of ECC).

michr · Jun 19, 2018

faberryman said:
Interesting. Can you explain the circumstances under which the image on the left became the image of the right?

It's most likely just one image, but there's a pixel-level error that's throwing everything off. See here for a deliberate application of this phenomenon.

https://snorpey.github.io/jpg-glitch/

Theo Sulphate · Jun 19, 2018

Nice abstract rendering of Oahu sunrise. Reminds me of Kodachrome.

NB23 · Jun 19, 2018

Nice nude shot gone Kodak

jtk · Jul 25, 2018

Patrick Robert James said:
Digital images are not archival. If you think they are, you are smokin' some whacky stuff. The big problem of course is when the original corrupts and in turn the backups get corrupted. I love all the "theoretically" mumbo jumbo. This is what happens in the real world to everything digital eventually.

View attachment 202727

"This is what happens in the real world to everything digital eventually." This is also what happens to everything non-digital.

Your purportedly archival silver print, your negative, your memory...your body and that of every-body.

The archival fantasy infects photographers that are resigned to stasis in lieu of art.

Saint Edward of Weston's ultimate photograph is more beautiful in its decay than its Kodabromide was in the beginning. Amen.

Berkeley Mike · Jul 25, 2018

jtk said:
Saint Edward of Weston's ultimate photograph is more beautiful in its decay than its Kodabromide was in the beginning. Amen.

Aha! Another slice fo the je ne sais quoi, and "magic" of analogue prints. There must be an new Decay emulation in Lightroom or a Decay setting in your camera to do this.

faberryman · Jul 25, 2018

jnanian said:
chemical based black and white photographers are fixated on a lot of things
from getting beautiful full scale images, to the perfect combination of grain and sharpness and bokeh
to getting positive vibes from using old and new beautiful cameras that could probably be in a museum somewhere
but they are also fixated on archival quality of images.

I think fixated is rather strong. I just process my prints in accordance with the instructions as I learned them in the 1970s. Which was about being archival. But I am not fixated. I just do it. It is really no trouble. It is just fresh fixer, PermaWash, and a decent wash. I think the people who are fixated are a segment of analog photographers who are fixated on digital not being archival. Since that is where most of the discussion is.

Vaughn · Jul 25, 2018

I would like to leave each of my boys a small portfolio of prints, in theory identical, that will remain unchanged in their lifetime. Originally I was thinking more along the lines of their kids and grandkids lifespans, with the portfolios divided up down the generations. But in the next 50 years (the boys are 21), other things might become more important than saving bulky non-survival-related items. And grandkids are unlikely, but not out of the question. So just in case, I'll mat up my well-processed platinum prints and carbon prints 'archivally', put them in good boxes and know that they have the potential to last a few hundred years without significant change.

This will be one of the images...Three Boys, Redwood, 2003, 8x10 Platinum/palladium from in-camera negative

Besk · Jul 25, 2018

I just turned 75.. And I have been planting pine trees on my farm. I won't receive any financial benefits from them. However, my wish is that my grandchildren will.
As to photography, most of it is with black and white on polyester base. If I go to the trouble to make the photo I want it to last.

This weekend I visited a friend in another city. I made a copy of a photo taken at her wedding in 1972. If it had been taken in digital what are the chances that I would have a copy 46 years later?

wiltw · Jul 25, 2018

jnanian said:
but they are also fixated on archival quality of images.
some say if procesed correctly a black and white fibre ( and maybe rc ) prints can last 500 years.
unless the images are in a public or private archive or museum why do we care if our photographs are able to last hundreds, or some say close to 1000 years.
are we vain ? are our photographs that interesting that they will dodge the dumpster and make it to the future ?

We are being short sighted if we failed to understand that even some very 'ordinary' photos could have tremendous historical / anthropoligical significance at some time in the future
Imagine taking photos of your 6 year old grandneice standing behind a cardboard box 'pulpit' pretending to make a speech to the neighborhood children, and decades later she is elected the first female, black, openly gay President of the USA! Anything can happen, look who we have today...many say he never imagined that he would win a primary, much less the election.

Theo Sulphate · Jul 25, 2018

Bob Eskridge said:
...
This weekend I visited a friend in another city. I made a copy of a photo taken at her wedding in 1972. If it had been taken in digital what are the chances that I would have a copy 46 years later?

P = (1/2)46 = essentially zip

wiltw said:
...
Imagine taking photos of your 6 year old grandneice standing behind a cardboard box 'pulpit' pretending to make a speech to the neighborhood children, and decades later she is elected the first female, black, openly gay President of the USA! ...

So you've met my neice, then?

eddie · Jul 25, 2018

There's not much extra effort involved in (at least) trying to process for longevity. The added few minutes are trivial in terms of the time needed to make a print that's worthy of archival treatment in the first place.

MartinCrabtree · Jul 25, 2018

I just hope after I've checked out maybe...maybe someone will find my B&W stuff in a box and enjoy looking at it. That's all nothing more.

are black and white photographers vain, all this talk about archival image making

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency