Is there much added value to viewing an actual photographic print, as opposed to one reproduced in a book or on the net? I suppose the question Im asking is does appreciation of print value form as much or more importance as opposed to just reproduction of these print values showing composition and content of an image. I would say not, although if I were viewing a painting I may have a different response.
It all turns on the quality of the "print"
A high quality book reproduction of a high quality print will trump a poor print every time.
Do you like virtual sex, beer, food, wine, art, etc? Or do you like the real thing better?
Yes, viewing the real print adds a lot of value. Especially in this day and age where almost everything is a digital copy of something real.
I dont agree with this analogy. An exhibition print of the Grand Canyon is still virtual as opposed to being there, as is a lithographic print, silk screen, inkjet, gravure, etc. Sometimes my students produce better representations of a negative image through scanning and inkjet printing than they do in the darkroom.
I dont agree with this analogy. An exhibition print of the Grand Canyon is still virtual as opposed to being there, as is a lithographic print, silk screen, inkjet, gravure, etc. Sometimes my students produce better representations of a negative image through scanning and inkjet printing than they do in the darkroom.
It was a question I asked.
My own level of enjoyment is infinitely enhanced by having something tangible to deal with; something I can touch with my own hands. The part of it that pleases me the most is that I'm alone with the object. Only my senses interpret, and that is where the value lies, freed of 'noise'.
In awnser to your original question I like the real thing better. But I don't see how this relates to a photographic print. You can be alone and touch a page in a book, as you can with a print made by any form of printing medium.
Yes, but in the book there is usually a level of interpretation in how the book should be printed, for example. It's not the 'real thing', even though for the most part it's the 'next best alternative'. Many of us cannot afford to buy expensive prints of our favorite artists, so we have to settle for a book.
But, I really enjoy a print a lot more than I do a copy in a book.
What do you mean by the real thing. My idea of the real thing would be the negative, or even the latent image.
Is it difficult to appreciate that someone likes to view an original print more than some reproduction in a book, or worse yet, on the internet?
No it isnt Thomas and I can understand how a hand crafted print particularly by the photographer is what a lot of people wish to see, particularly fellow darkroom workers. I suppose by value, I am talking about being precious about the print, and a lot depends on the type of picture we are looking at. A print can be crafted and produced in an infinite different ways, but only from the existing negative.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?