I didn't know that Ralph Gibson went completely digital

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 3, 2019

So does this make the prints he made in his darkroom more valuable?
https://www.wired.com/story/ralph-gibson-digital-color/

Luckless · Dec 3, 2019

I can't really imagine his shift to digital would have much of an impact on value of his previous prints as it current stand. Not like he can't wake up tomorrow and decide he misses film and start using it again.

jtk · Dec 3, 2019

Mainecoonmaniac said:
So does this make the prints he made in his darkroom more valuable?
https://www.wired.com/story/ralph-gibson-digital-color/

jtk · Dec 3, 2019

His signature is the basis of his price.

guangong · Dec 3, 2019

jtk said:
His signature is the basis of his price.

Such is the basis of most of the contemporary art market.

John Koehrer · Dec 3, 2019

Earlier prints can be a lot more valuable than later ones. Difference between digi and darkroom? What're current values of his work reflecting?

markbau · Dec 4, 2019

Just re-proves the old saying that the best camera is the one you have with you.

jtk · Dec 4, 2019

Actually...Gibson's work is famous mostly among photo students from a certain era, and all they knew was darkroom. If a photo student grew up able to afford an original Gibson print, they would want something from a darkroom. However, people who appreciate images and print quality more than they appreciate fanboy prints would probably pay more for an inkjet, assuming quality was excellent.

Mainecoonmaniac · Dec 4, 2019

John Koehrer said:
Difference between digi and darkroom?

If there's a lot of dodging a burning, prints made by him in the darkroom are pretty much unique. Digital prints can be made with the file and who knows made the print.

warden · Dec 4, 2019

This article could have been titled "Leica brand ambassador has a show at a Leica gallery and enjoys his free Leica cameras".

"Through it all, he has discovered that digital has its own unique visual language. The images are more compressed, foreshortened and unpredictable..." More compressed? Foreshortened? Huh? What do these traits have to do with digital vs film?

Ko.Fe. · Dec 4, 2019

Fred Herzog went to digital. And so is George Zimbel and Bruce Gulden. But only Gulden is fully capable with digital, IMO.
Ralph Gibson is not going to be in trouble. Audience always takes tits and boobs well. Just has to be image in focus.

jtk · Dec 4, 2019

Mainecoonmaniac said:
If there's a lot of dodging a burning, prints made by him in the darkroom are pretty much unique. Digital prints can be made with the file and who knows made the print.

Inkjet prints can entail even more dodging/burning than darkroom if that's desired. Many of Saint Ansel's prints were made from copy negatives by the San Francisco lab he hired for the purpose (zero dodging and burning of copy negatives)..

I didn't know that Ralph Gibson went completely digital

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency