I suspect your opinion is a problem of having too much knowledge about the process. Kind of like the Folgers taste test: everyone loves it until they find out it's Folgers, which is, in many minds (including mine), synonymous with doodoo. "Gads! I'd never drink that crap! It wasn't distilled in a darkroom!"
So he switched to digital? We're talking about one of the greatest, most dedicated photographers of our lifetime. Plus, he's 69 years old!
As Austin Powers would say: "cut me some fricking slack, people!"
Having different prints could be a great advantage when pricing. Instead of just having one price for let's say chemical prints, you create a choice by also have digital. Besides opening the market for buyers who can't spend so much, you can push the chemical ones even higher than if they were the only ones to sell. It's good merchandising.
It's like Calvin Klein who has the cheap line for Macy's and other outlets, Then they have the purple line which is more exclusively priced.
So Bob, is the problem that he shot digitally, or that the prints were made differently?
Unfortunately, Bob hasn't been participating here for a couple of years, so I would be surprised (and happy) to see him respond.
So Bob, is the problem that he shot digitally, or that the prints were made differently?
For collectable, well-known photographers work, the cost of equivalent size prints doesn't vary much whether silver or inkjet. The biggest part of the cost is the artist's work. Plus of course the gallery mark-up, matting and framing.
Post #16: Bob Carnie (2013)
"I think his editing of Genesis is a bit off and the printmaking has suffered with his move to digital.. There are really good inkjet prints out there, don't get me wrong. But this body of work seems rushed and not up to the quality level of 15 years ago.
some of the imagery , or to be honest a lot of the imagery is first rate, the finish is where I have problems."
I'm not sure how collectable Mr Butcher's work is. Open editions are generally much less than limited ones, digital or silver gelatin. Once again, although the fact that a print has been made by the photographer is a factor, the lion's share of the price of a collectable photo is the artist's vision, not just the craftsmanship of the print. And estate printed is less, too. Bret Weston's prints of his father's work are better IMO than what Edward printed, not sure what the market says.There's a substantial difference in Clyde Butchers' pricing between these. How can you say the post work is very little different when digital can be run off in quantity after the first is edited and created while chemical requires each one to be hand printed, developed, spotted, etc. Loads more labor.
Yes, thanks Greg. I noticed those posts after posting my own questions. This reminds me even when I hire a plumber or electrician, even from the same company, each one comes with their own experience and you get different quality work.
I'm not sure how collectable Mr Butcher's work is. Open editions are generally much less than limited ones, digital or silver gelatin. Once again, although the fact that a print has been made by the photographer is a factor, the lion's share of the price of a collectable photo is the artist's vision, not just the craftsmanship of the print. And estate printed is less, too. Bret Weston's prints of his father's work are better IMO than what Edward printed, not sure what the market says.
Alan, I really liked Salgado's early work. The mountain prints of his i saw were really disappointing in quality. They seemed oversharpened. The deep shadow were dead...& the general contrast seemed pumped up like bad HD.....That would have been my impression if i had seen them alone.....with Washburn's originals in the same room they were even more disappointing.
Why did they mix and match in the same room? That's poor curating. Our eyes often adjust for lighting and differences in things so we don't even notice. But as soon as you put two up there to compare, then there's always one that looks worse.
Because he and maybe his gallery have priced them at 9 grand doesn't mean much. How many does he sell at that price? I have to admit I'm biased, I don't find traditional landscapes very appealing, so I don't see the value there.He gets $9000 or so for 60" print. Someone's buying them.
Because he and maybe his gallery have priced them at 9 grand doesn't mean much. How many does he sell at that price? I have to admit I'm biased, I don't find traditional landscapes very appealing, so I don't see the value there.
I have a friend who is a fine art painter, has had museum and gallery shows, whose work is priced at 15 grand or so, depending on the size. Galleries and independent consultants have told him that his prices were fair or even low. He hasn't sold a thing in years.
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?