Keith Carter gallery vs National Geographic

[kfed1984]

They should be sold at what the market can bear, I suppose. And Pieter is correct, it is more than a colored piece of paper. This fellow limits the edition to 25...

I think this is where the NFT concept really comes in handy. In the case of the digital print, the value is in the digital image, which can be reprinted later if the paper print is gone. The value here is in bearing the rights to the image, kind of like copyright to use somebody's image online. The paper print is not really valued as much in this case. Whereas for traditional darkroom prints the value is all in the paper/medium.

 

[awty]

Keith Carter Ghostlight — PDNB Gallery | Photographs Do Not Bend Gallery | Art Gallery in Dallas, Texas

www.pdnbgallery.com

This stuff is easy to like and apparently very marketable. I'd like to see the prints.

In what way is it different from Photrio's standard-aspiration scenic photography?

Does the technically non-standard technique make a big difference vs National Geographic standard work?

The only time I see national geography type pictures in people's homes is if they are photographers. Nobody in the real world likes that type of decor. You can find stacks of them in thrift stores.
His work is quite beautiful and dreamy, that's what people like. The way it is produced is irrelevant to most people. Cheap prints are common, if you want a bit of exclusivity you need to spend, or at least you have the expectation to do so.

 

[Vaughn]

I think this is where the NFT concept really comes in handy. In the case of the digital print, the value is in the digital image, which can be reprinted later if the paper print is gone. The value here is in bearing the rights to the image, kind of like copyright to use somebody's image online. The paper print is not really valued as much in this case. Whereas for traditional darkroom prints the value is all in the paper/medium.

The NFT concept but as a limited edition?

 

[kfed1984]

They should be sold at what the market can bear, I suppose. And Pieter is correct, it is more than a colored piece of paper. This fellow limits the edition to 25...which if one were to go with my idea above, it probably should be that the owner sends the aged print back to the photographer, who documents its destruction and its numbered replacement. For example, if one bought #16 of 25 and colors shift over the years of display, the photographer replaces it with a new printing, #16 (2nd generation) of 25. If wishes were fishes...

If one is paying $1600 for the image -- it would be nice to hang it on the wall and have it stick around for awhile.

How much would it cost to print a 16x20 with the best ink on top-of-the-line professional printer? Just curious, these things do matter. If it costs $100, then I get it.

 

[kfed1984]

The NFT concept but as a limited edition?

Yes, I think NFTs can be fractionalized. So maybe sell the digital/ink-jet print along with the NFT portion, 1/100th of the NFT or whatever is the edition limit. Then I will not feel like I'm selling sand. High-quality ink-jet print backed up by an NFT edition fraction that sells with the print, and used as a certificate of authenticity. But again I don't really know how much does a 16x20 ink-jet print costs, the most top notch print, and how good it looks compared to carbon print lets say.

 

[Pieter12]

It’s not about the cost to make the print. An 8x10 Brett Westin print is worth more than all the prints you will ever make together.

 

[Vaughn]

How much would it cost to print a 16x20 with the best ink on top-of-the-line professional printer? Just curious, these things do matter. If it costs $100, then I get it.

If one doesn't know themself, one must pay a top-of-the-line professional printer to use the top-of-the-line professional printer...probably much more than $100.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

What carries more weight, the artist, or the materials?

 

[Pieter12]

What carries more weight, the artist, or the materials?

The artist. A sketch by Picasso on a scrap of paper carries more weight than any mediocre artist's life work on the finest Belgian linen.

 

[kfed1984]

It’s not about the cost to make the print. An 8x10 Brett Westin print is worth more than all the prints you will ever make together.

Its an even bigger misfortune not being born a Brett Weston and selling inkjet prints, like sand on the beach. At least the darkroom medium is something different.

 

[kfed1984]

What carries more weight, the artist, or the materials?

If its Picasso, then the artist. If its anyone here, then the medium.

 

[kfed1984]

The artist. A sketch by Picasso on a scrap of paper carries more weight than any mediocre artist's life work on the finest Belgian linen.

And until we become Picassos, the linen does kinda matter. Yes Picasso could sketch on a used napkin and be worth more than all my life work etc, etc... but if I was to purchase anything from anyone on this chat group, it better be on a darkroom print or Belgian linen.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I don't get out much...Belgian linen?

 

[Pieter12]

I don't get out much...Belgian linen?

Stay in. It’s not worth explaining.

 

[Don_ih]

You can get nice-looking prints on nice paper run through a nice inkjet printer (calling it "pigment" is just a way to sophisticate it - same as the word "giclee", or whatever). Those prints will probably be fine for the duration of your lifetime, provided you don't stick it in direct sunlight for 8 hours a day. And the fact is, if Joe or whoever wants $1600 for his 12x12 print of a yet-another-slow-shutter-waterfall photo, he'll only get it if you want to pay it. It's not what the print is worth, it's what it will fetch.
Same with NFTs. You may pay $10000 for that one-of-a-kind digital image of a dog licking itself, but it may not ever sell again for more than $3. Eventually, there will be more NFTs than there are grains of sand in the desert. When's the last time you were interested in any one particular grain of sand?

The thing people don't understand about the word "archival" is that it doesn't mean the thing will last forever. It means the thing will last a long time, in an archive - i.e., tucked away in a secure spot, away from light and air and humidity - and away from the ability to look at it.

 

[kfed1984]

You can get nice-looking prints on nice paper run through a nice inkjet printer (calling it "pigment" is just a way to sophisticate it - same as the word "giclee", or whatever). Those prints will probably be fine for the duration of your lifetime, provided you don't stick it in direct sunlight for 8 hours a day. And the fact is, if Joe or whoever wants $1600 for his 12x12 print of a yet-another-slow-shutter-waterfall photo, he'll only get it if you want to pay it. It's not what the print is worth, it's what it will fetch.
Same with NFTs. You may pay $10000 for that one-of-a-kind digital image of a dog licking itself, but it may not ever sell again for more than $3. Eventually, there will be more NFTs than there are grains of sand in the desert. When's the last time you were interested in any one particular grain of sand?

The thing people don't understand about the word "archival" is that it doesn't mean the thing will last forever. It means the thing will last a long time, in an archive - i.e., tucked away in a secure spot, away from light and air and humidity - and away from the ability to look at it.

My plan is to sell prints online at a very small fraction of the prices we're talking about here. Where the costs to make the prints matter. That's why all the talk of print quality, etc.

 

[tahomaphoto]

I don't get out much...Belgian linen?

Belgian linen is a type of fabric, made of flax (linen) grown in Belgium (or at least western Europe). It is a preferred substrate for oil paintings, and sometimes other media. It is a high-end type of canvas.

Does this help?

 

[TJones]

You can get nice-looking prints on nice paper run through a nice inkjet printer (calling it "pigment" is just a way to sophisticate it - same as the word "giclee", or whatever). Those prints will probably be fine for the duration of your lifetime, provided you don't stick it in direct sunlight for 8 hours a day. And the fact is, if Joe or whoever wants $1600 for his 12x12 print of a yet-another-slow-shutter-waterfall photo, he'll only get it if you want to pay it. It's not what the print is worth, it's what it will fetch.
Same with NFTs. You may pay $10000 for that one-of-a-kind digital image of a dog licking itself, but it may not ever sell again for more than $3. Eventually, there will be more NFTs than there are grains of sand in the desert. When's the last time you were interested in any one particular grain of sand?

The thing people don't understand about the word "archival" is that it doesn't mean the thing will last forever. It means the thing will last a long time, in an archive - i.e., tucked away in a secure spot, away from light and air and humidity - and away from the ability to look at it.

Calling it “pigment” should be done to inform the buyer that it was printed with pigment-based ink, which is more durable and archival than the less expensive dye-based ink.

 

[tahomaphoto]

Belgian linen is a type of fabric, made of flax (linen) grown in Belgium (or at least western Europe). It is a preferred substrate for oil paintings, and sometimes other media. It is a high-end type of canvas.

Does this help?

Belgian linen is also used in some bread baking applications.

 

[Vaughn]

What carries more weight, the artist, or the materials?

How heavy is a voice?

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Belgian linen is a type of fabric, made of flax (linen) grown in Belgium (or at least western Europe). It is a preferred substrate for oil paintings, and sometimes other media. It is a high-end type of canvas.

Does this help?

Sort of. I’m guessing it’s advertised by some manufacturers as a superior support for canvas prints?

 

[kfed1984]

Calling it “pigment” should be done to inform the buyer that it was printed with pigment-based ink, which is more durable and archival than the less expensive dye-based ink.

The first proper answer on what is a pigment print. Thank you. Turns out it's a pigment based ink jet vs. dye, and probably better in some sense. Now the question remains about the cost of making such a print and the technology. I assume the pigment is a very fine powder designed not to block the nozzles in the inkjet. Initially I was thinking this is more of a technical blog, and not sure why people get sensitive about what Picasso can do on a napkin vs. linen etc.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

How heavy is a voice?

That’s my point, in that it’s the artist and what they communicate, not the medium or the materials they choose to express themselves with that can tip the scales. I held biases against digital photography, but had to give them up after seeing images of undeniable strength and quality.

I’m reminded of reading on another forum a discussion about how pin registered masking of negatives while enlarging prints was a useless technique because the effects were garish and obvious. That’s crazy, because it’s possible to completely hide your hand while balancing a print using pin registered masks. It would be like saying dodging & burning is useless because you’ve seen bad examples of it.

Claiming that one kind of photography sucks because you’ve only seen bad examples of it, may simply mean you haven’t seen good examples yet. Just because most digital images are over sharpened and poorly processed doesn’t mean the materials can’t produce strong images.

This is where the artist carries more weight than the materials they choose to work with.

 

[TJones]

The first proper answer on what is a pigment print. Thank you. Turns out it's a pigment based ink jet vs. dye, and probably better in some sense. Now the question remains about the cost of making such a print and the technology. I assume the pigment is a very fine powder designed not to block the nozzles in the inkjet. Initially I was thinking this is more of a technical blog, and not sure why people get sensitive about what Picasso can do on a napkin vs. linen etc.

I was simply responding to the assertion that “calling it "pigment" is just a way to sophisticate it”. When talking about inkjet prints, that’s incorrect. However, there are other pigment printing processes unrelated to inkjet.

 

[Don_ih]

Calling it “pigment” should be done to inform the buyer that it was printed with pigment-based ink, which is more durable and archival than the less expensive dye-based ink.

Yes, but it is still an inkjet print. They haven't yet started calling it pigjet.

The first proper answer on what is a pigment print.

Drew answered it well enough. Inkjet print that uses fine ground solid pigment in suspension. He just hid it in a complaint that it shouldn't be compared with things like carbon printing.

And actual pigment printers deserve to be distinguished form inkjet machines which by design require compromises due to the tiny tiny nature of what has to pass through those nozzles tiny themselves, which prohibit many pigment particles. Yeah, it's remarkable technology capable of its own thing, but true pigment printing ain't one of them. That label should be legitimately reserved for things like carbon, carbro, Fresson, gum printing, etc.