Galleries to see high-quality large optical prints in the US?

Steven Lee · Thursday at 12:12 AM

I enjoy seeing a high quality optical print, but unfortunately when visiting galleries it is not always possible know what kind of prints are on display. What are the well-known, always-there places to see optically enlarged prints bigger than 24" on the wide side?

I travel a lot for work around the US, so I am not bound geographically.
Thanks!

Patrick Robert James · Thursday at 1:27 AM

Not sure how many photographers are still doing optical prints. Your best bet would be to find out who is, and then search for their galleries. You might be better off in museums but prints that large weren't very common back in the film days. Large printing didn't really come into fashion until Epson made their first large printer. Of course that is also when people started abandoning the darkroom.

I know Guillaume Zuilli does large optical lith prints. Michael Kenna still makes prints but I don't know if he prints that large. Earlier Todd Hido prints were optical and I think large, but not anymore. The best Cibachrome printer perhaps ever is Christopher Burkett and he prints large. That may be your best bet if you really want to see optical color prints. They are pretty extraordinary. That is all I can come up with spitballing off the top of my head. If I remember anyone else I'll try to add them.

Taylor Nankervis · Thursday at 2:11 AM

The largest Ilfochrome Classic prints, some of which were printed in Australia at long-defunct Chromacolour in Adelaide (where I worked), are in Peter Lìk's galleries scattered around the US. Latterly his printing is by giclée, but the Ilfochrome prints, shot on a Linhof 6x17, printed enormously and framed exquisitely, are the (very) real deal for original darkroom-created prints (and their production and shipping cost is something only he could afford!!).

A US$26,000 asking price for one of these wall-fillers wouldn't be outlandish.

Carnie Bob · Thursday at 8:50 AM

We still make optical enlarged BW prints here in Toronto, as well as hybrid BW prints. I have clients that wish to keep the workflow historically correct to their preferred method , others do not care or have switched to digital capture and we can only go the hybrid approach. I stopped doing optical colour prints about 12 years ago due to the fading issues of dye coupler prints .

BrianShaw · Thursday at 9:49 AM

Perhaps @DREW WILEY has recommendations. Drew...?

koraks · Thursday at 9:52 AM

Steven Lee said:
when visiting galleries it is not always possible know what kind of prints are on display

It's usually indicated, and otherwise you could ask the personnel. Most prints these days are evidently not optical enlargements, especially not the bigger ones.

Steven Lee said:
What are the well-known, always-there places to see optically enlarged prints bigger than 24" on the wide side?

I don't think the art market works that way. It's not exactly an IKEA you're walking into. "I'm looking for a bedroom closet that will fit this here 3ft alcove we have in our house, preferably birch finish..."

Steven Lee · Thursday at 12:58 PM

koraks said:
I don't think the art market works that way. It's not exactly an IKEA you're walking into. "I'm looking for a bedroom closet that will fit this here 3ft alcove we have in our house, preferably birch finish..."

There are community photolabs in SF and Oakland where they always have members' prints on display. There are also large office buildings in NYC with lobbies 100% decorated by optical prints. Just two examples I've seen, and asking for more.

Pieter12 · Thursday at 2:01 PM

Collectors don't really care too much about process, so galleries will show what the artist produces, be it silver gelatin, platinum, inkjet or alternative process. So your chances of seeing optical prints will vary by show, not necessarily by gallery. It is common for photographers to mix optical and inkjet prints in a show, too.

logan2z · Thursday at 2:21 PM

Pieter12 said:
Collectors don't really care too much about process,

Not sure that's true in general. I know collectors who look down upon inkjet prints and hold silver gelatin and alternative process prints in much higher regard.

Pieter12 said:
It is common for photographers to mix optical and inkjet prints in a show, too.

I don't have an issue with that, but I really hate when I see inkjet prints that were made from film negatives. My classic example is Dorothea Lange inkjets being shown at an exhibition at the Monterey Museum of Art. That was really disappointing.

Pieter12 · Thursday at 2:24 PM

logan2z said:
Not sure that's true. I know collectors who look down upon inkjet prints and hold silver gelatin and alternative process prints in much higher regard.

My limited knowledge is that collectors tend to collect by subject, era or photographer. Of course, they might value a silver or alternative process print more because it might be a more limited edition, but I don't think their priority is process.

wiltw · Thursday at 5:07 PM

The de Young Museaum, in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco often has photograph collections on display, and currently has a lot of photos by Paul Lennon and Ansel Adams, among others.

MattKing · Thursday at 5:17 PM

The criteria in @Steven Lee 's request that baffles me somewhat is the need to see really large prints.

Pieter12 · Thursday at 5:24 PM

Salgado's work is printed on silver gelatin, as well as some platinum prints, and he printed large enough to fulfill the OP's request. There is currently an exhibit at Peter Fetterman Gallery in Santa Monica. https://www.peterfetterman.com/exhibitions/44-the-world-of-sebastiao-salgado-the-memorial/works/

GregY · Thursday at 5:45 PM

MattKing said:
The criteria in @Steven Lee 's request that baffles me somewhat is the need to see really large prints.

<3

djdister · Thursday at 5:54 PM

I think it will depend on the individual artist/exhibit and not that certain galleries will only show silver prints, but if someone finds a list of galleries that only show optical silver prints, I would love to see it.

Is the OP not thinking of galleries with exhibits of large platinum prints?

Alan Edward Klein · Thursday at 6:10 PM

Clyde Butcher
https://clydebutcher.com/galleries/ always can see his large prints.
https://clydebutcher.com/events/category/all/exhibits/ exhibits elsewheres
https://clydebutcher.com/ main page

GregY · Thursday at 6:24 PM

Pieter12 said:
My limited knowledge is that collectors tend to collect by subject, era or photographer. Of course, they might value a silver or alternative process print more because it might be a more limited edition, but I don't think their priority is process.

Collectors i know value original prints especially those printed by the artist.
A 40" print of Edward Weston's pepper....not so much

pentaxuser · Thursday at 7:15 PM

logan2z said:
I don't have an issue with that, but I really hate when I see inkjet prints that were made from film negatives. My classic example is Dorothea Lange inkjets being shown at an exhibition at the Monterey Museum of Art. That was really disappointing.

My question stems from my curiosity about being able to tell the difference between inkjets from film negatives and inkjets from digital capture so what was it about the inkjets that enabled you to know they were inkjets?

Thanks

pentaxuser

images39 · Thursday at 7:23 PM

Photography West in Carmel, CA has some large darkroom prints.

Dale

images39 · Thursday at 7:35 PM

Linking to Photography West in Carmel:

Home

Photography West was founded in 1980 to support film photographers, and promote public recognition of fine art darkroom craftsmanship.

photographywest.com

Dale

logan2z · Thursday at 8:42 PM

pentaxuser said:
what was it about the inkjets that enabled you to know they were inkjets?

They looked flat and lifeless. It’s possible they were just poorly done inkjets but they paled in comparison to the few silver gelatin prints that were in the exhibit.

GregY · Thursday at 8:52 PM

logan2z said:
They looked flat and lifeless. It’s possible they were just poorly done inkjets but they paled in comparison to the few silver gelatin prints that were in the exhibit.

A few years back I saw an exhibit at the New Mexico Museum of Modern Art. Large format photos of Shiprock & Mont Saint Michel by the very fine LF photographer William Clift. Among the prints were some digital prints (from negatives)....they were of such high quality that you literally had to look at the description card to identify them. & that's my opinion commenting as a complete luddite darkroom nerd....
Digital printing has come a long way...... it's not the same.... but exceptional work has been done

Patrick Robert James · Thursday at 11:32 PM

Learning to make good inkjet prints takes as long as learning to make good optical prints. People often treat it like it is just a mouse click though.

Carnie Bob · 2025-07-25T08:43:19-0400

logan2z said:
They looked flat and lifeless. It’s possible they were just poorly done inkjets but they paled in comparison to the few silver gelatin prints that were in the exhibit.

That would probably be the fault of the person making the inkjets, we do both and its extremely hard to tell the difference if at all.

Galleries to see high-quality large optical prints in the US?

Steven Lee

Patrick Robert James

Taylor Nankervis

Carnie Bob

BrianShaw

koraks

Moderator

Steven Lee

Pieter12

logan2z

Pieter12

wiltw

MattKing

Moderator

Pieter12

GregY

djdister

Alan Edward Klein

GregY

pentaxuser

images39

images39

Home

logan2z

GregY

Patrick Robert James

Carnie Bob

Galleries to see high-quality large optical prints in the US?

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency