print quality

I believe it was Fred Picker of Zone VI who use to sell sets of prints at very low prices for just that purpose. I bought some long ago and was able to see what a good print looked like . Not too many traveling exhibitions in small towns anymore, mores the pity.

Yes it was. He sold them as sets of 3 or one individually. I have one. It's great to have one just to see a print with full tonal range and then you can decide how you want to print. Great learning tool! Today's world needs a Fred Picker/Zone VI!

rmolson said:

I believe it was Fred Picker of Zone VI who use to sell sets of prints at very low prices for just that purpose. I bought some long ago and was able to see what a good print looked like . Not too many traveling exhibitions in small towns anymore, mores the pity.

Click to expand...

I fell for that. It was the only product I ever bought from Zone VI Studios with which I was dissatisfied. They were NOT quality prints by any stretch of the imagination.

+1
I threw them out , the white snow and water image was really bad.

c6h6o3 said:

I fell for that. It was the only product I ever bought from Zone VI Studios with which I was dissatisfied. They were NOT quality prints by any stretch of the imagination.

Click to expand...

Bob,
I don't blame you for throwing them out. Picker was a much better marketer than photographer.
The standard which I used to use was an Ansel Adams print of "Moon over Half Dome" which I bought from him directly for $35. A very good investment.

Later on, Fred had others printing the Fine Prints. Some printers were better than others. The print that accompanied the Printing with Fred Picker video was awful - dingy gray snow, dead shadows. I threw mine out.

When well-printed, they were good. I still use one as a "reference print" in my darkroom. Not a particularly appealing picture, but a good print for reference.

Both Paul Paletti (http://paulpalettigallery.com/) and Paula Chamlee have told me that they've seen portfolios of Fred's work, shown to them by Lil Farber, and that the prints were nothing short of magnificent. This is one tough pair of critics. So I know that he did make really fine prints.

I think he probably was a great printer, but those reference prints were crap.
As I type and look to my left I have all of his newsletters within arms length with all my other technical books, traditional and digital.
I patiently waited for every single one, still use his drying racks after 20 years of use, lost his video, and have a couple of his books.

He certainly influenced a lot of people, myself included. but those reference prints sucked big time.

c6h6o3 said:

Both Paul Paletti (http://paulpalettigallery.com/) and Paula Chamlee have told me that they've seen portfolios of Fred's work, shown to them by Lil Farber, and that the prints were nothing short of magnificent. This is one tough pair of critics. So I know that he did make really fine prints.

Click to expand...

My Zone VI modified Pentax spot meter still works perfectly after 20 years of dropping it off cliffs, smashing it into walls, denting it, breaking the dial off the side of it and leaving it out overnight in the snow. I still use my Zone VI 8x10 contact printing frame to make all my prints. I sold my Zone VI tripod a while back and replaced it with a Ries. While the Ries is lighter and fits my photographing style better in use, the Zone VI is a lot more rugged. I liked his stuff so much that I easily forgave him those prints (which, really Bob, were not that bad - They just weren't fine).

You have to put it in perspective, I was a young printer , there was no internet,
I walked twenty miles back and forth to the mailbox, and my only joy was the Fred Picker notes and can you imagine how I patiently saved my pennies to get the reference prints.
A smoke signal came over the hill saying my mailbox had a package, I ran , man did I run to the box, I could not wait to get back to my darkroom, I had the holy grail in my hand and it was going to make me a great printer.
All I had to do was look and drink in the exquisite details of the snow and the wonderful deep black detail of the water.
When I opened the box, I couldn't breath I was so excited, this was it , every thing Fred promised me was about to come true..

talk about lunch bag let down.

c6h6o3 said:

My Zone VI modified Pentax spot meter still works perfectly after 20 years of dropping it off cliffs, smashing it into walls, denting it, breaking the dial off the side of it and leaving it out overnight in the snow. I still use my Zone VI 8x10 contact printing frame to make all my prints. I sold my Zone VI tripod a while back and replaced it with a Ries. While the Ries is lighter and fits my photographing style better in use, the Zone VI is a lot more rugged. I liked his stuff so much that I easily forgave him those prints (which, really Bob, were not that bad - They just weren't fine).

Click to expand...

Playing the Devil's Advocate again...

As long as the reference print(s) do not cause one to stray from one's own "vision", or stops one from push oneself even further (because one has gotten prints as good as the reference prints).

Some of the best silver gelatin prints I have seen are by Brett Weston -- I doubt if Fred ever printed with such large incredible pure black areas on his prints. Fortunately, Brett never printed using Fred's prints as a guide.

I have a Zone VI 8x10 -- very nice camera, but I do need to take care because to light traps on the back are minimal and I have had light leaks.

Jim Noel said:

Bob,
I don't blame you for throwing them out. Picker was a much better marketer than photographer.
The standard which I used to use was an Ansel Adams print of "Moon over Half Dome" which I bought from him directly for $35. A very good investment.

Click to expand...

I also have that print and love it. He wrote that it was Panatomic-x, but Alan Ross says the negative is clearly edge marked R17, therefore Adox.
Mark