Paul Raphaelson Ups His Price

[copake_ham]

Going back to OP.

I look at it this way.

I'm Paul and I'm thinking:

"My film negatives-based, traditional handmade prints command $1200. Making those prints takes a heck of a lot of my time.

Buyers are increasingly indifferent to print quality and will pay that sum or close to it regardless.

Shooting digital and using inkjet will increase my work throughput tremendously.

So, SHOW ME THE MONEY!"

 

[John McCallum]

Good grief !

Any others out there we can mark publically as a reprobate for such decisions they make? Obviously you know how to run a business. :rolleyes:

Get a life.

 

[paulr]

Going back to OP.

I look at it this way.

I'm Paul and I'm thinking:

"My film negatives-based, traditional handmade prints command $1200. Making those prints takes a heck of a lot of my time.

Buyers are increasingly indifferent to print quality and will pay that sum or close to it regardless.

Shooting digital and using inkjet will increase my work throughput tremendously.

So, SHOW ME THE MONEY!"

well, I actually am Paul, and that's not quite what I'm thinking.

I don't find buyers to be increasingly indiferent to print quality, although I do find them increasingly open minded about what kinds of prints they'll consider.

And while I would like to say my prints "command" $1200, at the rate that I sell work, it would be more accurate to say that they ask for it very, very quietly.

I also have yet to own a digital camera. I don't think they're evil, but at this point in history, for what I can afford, I get much better quality from film ... from a 4x5 and a (borrowed) hasselblad, both older than I am.

I made the investment in digital printing because i was working on an artist's book project, and it seemed like the ideal medium. This was right around the time that Forte became unavailable. I was uninterested seeking out and learning a new silver paper, since in all probability it would meet the same fate ... so I took the plunge and learned to print in ink.

What keeps me printing in ink, even though my silver paper is on the market again, is that I love the prints.

Because of the book project, I've had the opportunity to reprint an entire body of work that had previously been done in silver. To my tastes, about half the time, I like the ink print better. About a quarter of the time I like the silver print better. And about a quarter of the time it's a tossup. Five years ago, I would have found this impossible to imagine. But here i am saying it.

Your results could be different. This is in the context of one body of work, and my personal feelings about it. It still amazes me, because I was very proud of most of those silver prints.

I still have all my darkroom equipment. And I miss using it. But It's been a couple of years since I've actually been compelled to make a darkroom print. I don't feel like I've jumped ship, or become something else ... I've just expanded my toolbox to something that's working better for me right now.

As far as "show me the money" ... just like before, I'm consuming a whole lot more than I'm bringing in. That's not likely to change unless Jon Cone shows me how to print up some $50 bills.

 

[copake_ham]

Hi Paul,

I see you just joined APUG.

Now the OP said:

Paul sells silver gelatine prints up to 9 1/2 x 11 1/2. All
sizes, $1200. Up from last years $1000. He prints on Forte
Fortezo Grade three. Big news is his going digital. He claims
he can no longer secure any of that paper. He has used
it for many years.

So, there won't be any more silver gelatine from Paul.
When they are gone they are gone. If you've been
yearning for one of his on Forte prints now is the
time to send in that $1200 bucks. Dan

Yet subsequent posters said that in fact this paper continues to be available.

And you said:

well, I actually am Paul, and that's not quite what I'm thinking.

I don't find buyers to be increasingly indiferent to print quality, although I do find them increasingly open minded about what kinds of prints they'll consider.

And while I would like to say my prints "command" $1200, at the rate that I sell work, it would be more accurate to say that they ask for it very, very quietly.

I also have yet to own a digital camera. I don't think they're evil, but at this point in history, for what I can afford, I get much better quality from film ... from a 4x5 and a (borrowed) hasselblad, both older than I am.

I made the investment in digital printing because i was working on an artist's book project, and it seemed like the ideal medium. This was right around the time that Forte became unavailable. I was uninterested seeking out and learning a new silver paper, since in all probability it would meet the same fate ... so I took the plunge and learned to print in ink.

What keeps me printing in ink, even though my silver paper is on the market again, is that I love the prints.

Because of the book project, I've had the opportunity to reprint an entire body of work that had previously been done in silver. To my tastes, about half the time, I like the ink print better. About a quarter of the time I like the silver print better. And about a quarter of the time it's a tossup. Five years ago, I would have found this impossible to imagine. But here i am saying it.

Your results could be different. This is in the context of one body of work, and my personal feelings about it. It still amazes me, because I was very proud of most of those silver prints.

I still have all my darkroom equipment. And I miss using it. But It's been a couple of years since I've actually been compelled to make a darkroom print. I don't feel like I've jumped ship, or become something else ... I've just expanded my toolbox to something that's working better for me right now.

As far as "show me the money" ... just like before, I'm consuming a whole lot more than I'm bringing in. That's not likely to change unless Jon Cone shows me how to print up some $50 bills.

In that I read that while you now admit that this paper is available - you have come to prefer inkjet printing for its artistic capabiities over silver.

Seems as if this is a strange web site to advance that theory.

You said you haven't been in the darkroom for two years.
Though, if fact, though you still use that dear old Hassey, silver printing just doesn't cut it any more (at least not 75% of the time). Oh, and it also means your work throughput is now much faster - right?

Oh, and yes, you note that buyers have become more receptive of inkjet prints (perhaps, because they are less astute?).

But this all rings false, somehow.

Like maybe the OP was a "shill" and figured folks here would rush for the last chance to get a "real" Paul R.?

Paul, I live in NYC - want to buy a bridge to Brooklyn?

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Hi Paul,

I'm glad you're happy. There's room in the pool for everyone

Murray

 

[Kino]

Hey George.

What the Hell?

How about giving it a rest, or are you the self-appointed net cop for APUG?

The man gave his reasons; he doesn't have to answer to you.

GET IT?

Sheesh.

 

[John McCallum]

... he said then she said ....

Seems as if this is a strange web site to advance that theory ...

Well here we get to the crux of it. Paul actually didn't come here to 'advance his theory', but ended up having to defend his decision from the likes of you. Which is a bit of a joke when you think about it. After all, your own theory I have no doubt comes from the comfy armchair (or someone elses office chair more likely) of someone who has never sold a single print of their own as art, or even bought anyone elses for that matter. Am I wrong?

Paul, most here welcome anyone who is film friendly and puts themselves out there with serious effort in their photography.

Hope to see you around.

 

[paulr]

Seems as if this is a strange web site to advance that theory.

I didn't come here to advance a theory; only to respond to some things that were being said about my intentions.

Oh, and it also means your work throughput is now much faster - right?

Not quite. It takes me about twice as long to get the first print right. But after that the editions are much easier, and I don't have to print them all at once.

Like maybe the OP was a "shill" and figured folks here would rush for the last chance to get a "real" Paul R.?

I don't know the OP or what his motives are. Strange conspiracy, though ... to try to sell photographs to photographers. Particularly to a group that's openly uninterested in the kind of work that I do.

I live in NYC - want to buy a bridge to Brooklyn?

Your offer is generous, but right now I'd rather spend my limited funds on photographing it.

If you'd rather use our proximity to see these ink prints in person, side by side with the silver prints, I'd be open to showing them to you. Not to try to sell you anything, but to let you base your opinion on evidence instead of prejudice. I find it makes for better conversation.

 

[paulr]

do understand Paul that not everyone on apug is a loser, playing a zealot to get attention.

Most here welcome anyone who is film friendly and puts themselves out there with serious effort in their photography.

Hope to see you around.

Thanks John. And no worries. I can understand if some around here get a little defensive. The world of film faces real threats these days, and you guys are fighting the good fight. But I come in peace ... even if I spend a bit of my time over on the dark side.

Cheers,
P

 

[jimcollum]

hi Paul,

your web site is looking good. i'm looking forward to your Wilderness book coming out (some great work in there). As others have said, it's not really a bad place, inspite of a bad first impression.

jim

 

[copake_ham]

Well, glad to hear you clear that up and that you're not looking to unload the last of your silver print stuff here.

Guess this guy really was just an uninformed poster:

Paul sells silver gelatine prints up to 9 1/2 x 11 1/2. All
sizes, $1200. Up from last years $1000. He prints on Forte
Fortezo Grade three. Big news is his going digital. He claims
he can no longer secure any of that paper. He has used
it for many years.

So, there won't be any more silver gelatine from Paul.
When they are gone they are gone. If you've been
yearning for one of his on Forte prints now is the
time to send in that $1200 bucks. Dan

Oh, just a thought, why the 20% price increase? If you find that 50% of the time you prefer your inkjet prints - shouldn't you be discounting the silvers?

 

[paulr]

I raised the price over two years ago, before I even started making the ink prints.

The price difference between the prints is based entirely on rarity. If someone is interested in buying a print from me, I'm completely upfront about which type of print I prefer for that particular image. But my preference will not always be somebody else's.

 

[copake_ham]

I raised the price over two years ago, before I even started making the ink prints.

The price difference between the prints is based entirely on rarity. If someone is interested in buying a print from me, I'm completely upfront about which type of print I prefer for that particular image. But my preference will not always be somebody else's.

Paul,

Thanks for clearing all this up.

You see, contrary to what was posted above, I'm not some kind of a web cop, or anything.

It's just that my understanding is that APUG is so dedicated to traditional prints format that it will not permit sales of inkjets etc. to be sold through APUG-Gallery.com

Dead Link Removed

The OP and your initial reply post to mine seemed, to me (my stupid, duh) like a rationale for advancing inkjet print sales on the main site.

Now I realize that the OP was just giving us here a chance to get the last of the "good stuff" because you've moved on to "another" format.

 

[Shane Knight]

why would anyone would want to invest in a photographer that is not in it for the long run.

I am not sure why I wrote this, but I need to apologize. Looks like Paul has been in it for the "long run" way before I knew what a silver photograph was.

Paul,
Welcome to APUG and maybe if you stick around for awhile, we can get you back to the REAL dark side.

Shane Knight

western horse photography

 

[juan]

I'll welcome you to APUG, too, Paul. If truth be known, there are a number of photographers here who use digital in some stage of their photographic process - they just don't talk about that part here.
juan

 

[Kerik]

FWIW, I've known Paul for over 10 years. We've been in group shows together a few times. While I found the original posting odd, I can tell you the quality of Paul's silver prints is absolutely top notch and his standards are VERY high. If he says his inkjet prints are usually superior to the silver conterparts, I absolutely believe that to be the truth. And notice he still uses film! I hope Paul will stick around APUG despite the knee-jerk attitude of some of the anti-digital zealots. APUG can be a good place for discussing ethical and aesthetic issues of photography, not just nuts and bolts, and believe me, Paul has a great deal to contribute in those areas. There are few people I know who are as perceptive and articulate about art and photograhpy as Paul.

 

[smieglitz]

Just looked at your work. gorgeous.

Thanks.

do you sell it? do you have problems giving up your favorites?

What? And break my streak?

I've had offers but can't bear to part with a few of them...Some I could let go. I have in my head the idea to actually make two plates of each subject if time permits...one to show and one to go...time hasn't permitted that in the field as of yet. Perhaps inside in the studio this winter it will be a different story.

Joe

 

[Kerik]

I have in my head the idea to actually make two plates of each subject if time permits...one to show and one to go...time hasn't permitted that in the field as of yet. Perhaps inside in the studio this winter it will be a different story.

Joe

Joe,

That's what I've been doing since most of my recent collodion work has been in studio. I often end up with 2 or 3 plates for a given image. I keep one, then the other(s) are up for grabs. Even so, as you know, each plate is different and may be 'better' or 'worse' in different ways, so sometimes deciding who stays and who goes is difficult. Now that I've sold a few, it's getting a little easier to let them go...

 

[paulr]

Thanks for the friendly words, Kerik and Jim and everyone else. If I feel I have anything to contribute, I'll swing by.

P

 

[dancqu]

While I found the original posting odd, ...

That OP was meant only to be some what informative.
I'm sure it has been, and of interest.

I happened to be searching Google for an epinion Paul
posted some years ago applauding Forte Fortezo. Specifically
I was hoping to confirm his saying that he managed 2 1/2
grades from the Grade 3 he used. I had it mind for years
that he used some brew such as Beer's or even Adams'
Ansco 130. I now wonder if so much control is
possible with such developers.

I know he does compound his own chemistry. He has a film
developer listed at Jacks Pics. Steve Anchell and he have
collaborated on a modified FX-11. Likely his Nelson Gold
toner has been fine tuned by himself. Dan