The Printmakers Art

[Bob Carnie]

Brett Weston IMO is one of the best printers of all time, so much so I am making a road trip to Colorado this summer just to see a bunch of his prints in one location.
I mean there are lots of other great printers , but his work always seemed to be at a very high level and standard as you say.
Every thing I read about him , and his books tells me he was unique.

I recently saw a print of Brett's Holland Canal -- the richness of that print sets a very high standard, indeed.

http://www.photographywestgraphics.com/posters/pages/hc.php

I had to do a bit of a google search to find a representaive image -- really shows this limit of screen-based images!

 

[Bob Carnie]

Also Paletti Gallery in Louisville

Also Fraenkel Gallery.

 

[Vaughn]

Brett Weston IMO is one of the best printers of all time...

He is the image maker/printer I use as an example of someone who truly used total black as part of the image. One does not have to see into every shadow in a print, and those areas can be large -- if you do it anywhere as well as Brett.

 

[Allen Friday]

Visiting museums and galleries has had a significant impact on my own work. Two particular shows come to mind. 1. The French Monument Survey, work I saw on display in Paris. The print quality amazed me--even though the prints were from the 1850s. 2. Photographers of Genius which I saw at the Getty in LA. This show was particularly helpful to me in that it had photos from the the 1840s to modern prints. I went through the display numerous times. I kept getting drawn to the platinum, silver chloride contact prints and albumen prints. The modern prints were beautiful, but not as satisfying to my eye. Seeing the work of masters in each method in close proximity helped me to chose the direction of my own work. I now work mainly in platinum, silver chloride and print out paper. The shows helped me to discover the processes which fit my preferred aesthetic.

 

[R Shaffer]

He is the image maker/printer I use as an example of someone who truly used total black as part of the image. One does not have to see into every shadow in a print, and those areas can be large -- if you do it anywhere as well as Brett.

Another Weston and master of B&W printing is Kim Weston. He printed quite a lot of his uncle and grandfathers work, possibly even the ones you have seen. A unsung benefit of going to one of his workshops is getting to see all that fine work from three generations of Westons. He'll even dig specific images out if you know what your after.

The Monterey Museum of Art has a really really nice collection of photos. I thought the quality was better than what I saw at SF MOMA

http://www.montereyart.org/collections/photography/

 

[bwrules]

Would be interesting to see work of good photographers who are soso printers. Anyone know?

 

[Vaughn]

Another Weston and master of B&W printing is Kim Weston. He printed quite a lot of his uncle and grandfathers work, possibly even the ones you have seen. ...

The one I just saw had the separate hole cut in the mat for Brett's signature -- so I'll assume Brett printed it. Safe assumption?

Vaughn

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Ian

We may have seen different prints. Recently, there were original Bresson prints on display in a Cologne Gallery. The images were great, the print quality was lousy, but again, it may have been their storage and age and not a reflection of the printer's abilities.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Visiting museums and galleries has had a significant impact on my own work. Two particular shows come to mind. 1. The French Monument Survey, work I saw on display in Paris. The print quality amazed me--even though the prints were from the 1850s. 2. Photographers of Genius which I saw at the Getty in LA. This show was particularly helpful to me in that it had photos from the the 1840s to modern prints. ...

I'm convinced that lot of the print quality in older prints has to do with their large format and less so with extraordinary printing abilities.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Would be interesting to see work of good photographers who are soso printers. Anyone know?

The galleries are full of them. Let's remember that many good photographers never printed themselves. They were too busy making great photographs and considered printing a necessary evil and not part of the creative process. I enjoy doing both, and I'm also convinced that half the art is in the printing. Printing is not craft alone. Unfortunately, I'm pretty alone with this view.

 

[markbarendt]

I'm there with ya Ralph.

 

[Klainmeister]

I would agree with you, Ralph. They are two parts of the same coin, but for some, printing is just something that "has to get done". That being said, I feel my generation is spending quite a bit of time in the post-processing/printing world via the digital, which I always find intriguing. The sheer amount of time spent on PS with 10,000 raw images from two minutes on the South Rim.

 

[Allen Friday]

I'm convinced that lot of the print quality in older prints has to do with their large format and less so with extraordinary printing abilities.

So what's your point? Is print making limited to enlargements only?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

So what's your point? Is print making limited to enlargements only?

No. My point is that the print quality of older prints often has to do with the large negative format they are made from and less with the ability of the printer. Larger negatives have a subtle tonality hard to achieve with smaller negatives.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

... I feel my generation is spending quite a bit of time in the post-processing/printing world via the digital, which I always find intriguing. The sheer amount of time spent on PS with 10,000 raw images from two minutes on the South Rim.

Good point. Digital has brought back a heightened attention to 'printing' and the realization that image-taking composition is not the only creative part of image making. Sometimes, however, they (digital image makers) go overboard and put too much emphasize on the post-processing part and image-taking turns into a mere collection of image material for PS.

Anyway, we (analog printers) also need to realize that image-taking and image-printing need to work together in harmony. Neither alone can achieve perfection in my opinion.

 

[Vaughn]

...Anyway, we (analog printers) also need to realize that image-taking and image-printing need together in harmony. Neither alone can achieve perfection in my opinion.

That is how I work...

 

[walbergb]

I've enjoyed reading this thread because it is an issue I've struggled with. It's hard to improve when you only have yourself to model after. Fortunately, I have a friend who is a former professional photographer and is more than willing to critique my work and discuss any and all aspects of traditional photography.

 

[johnnywalker]

I've enjoyed reading this thread because it is an issue I've struggled with. It's hard to improve when you only have yourself to model after. Fortunately, I have a friend who is a former professional photographer and is more than willing to critique my work and discuss any and all aspects of traditional photography.

Lucky you! APUG forums and books fill a need for we outlanders and others with no mentors nearby, but there's nothing like having a face-to-face discussion. Workshops also help fill the void I suppose but they are, for me, far away and expensive.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

... Workshops also help fill the void ...

A good point that was not mentioned yet. I've seen the best prints at workshops with Howard Bond and John Sexton.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The galleries are full of them. Let's remember that many good photographers never printed themselves. They were too busy making great photographs and considered printing a necessary evil and not part of the creative process. I enjoy doing both, and I'm also convinced that half the art is in the printing. Printing is not craft alone. Unfortunately, I'm pretty alone with this view.

No, I also agree. Photography is a complete package from previsualization to the mounting of the print. I don't know how a photographer can let someone else print his negatives. Only the photographer himself knows what he wants to say.

 

[Klainmeister]

Precisely. I think output control is absolutely essential.

 

[Allen Friday]

Different strokes for different folks. I personally enjoy printing my own work. I can't imagine letting someone else print my negatives. I also have the skills necessary to get the print I want--most of the time.

Nevertheless, I understand that some photographers don't want to spend the time in the darkroom, and some may not have the skill to create a print which reflects their vision. They rely on others who can create the print. Just because a photographer is not doing the actual printing doesn't mean he or she necessarily surrenders the creative process completely to the printer. I remember seeing a work print which Avedon had covered with notes directing the printer how Avedon wanted the final print to look. I have an AA photo on my wall printed by Alan Ross--no complaints on the quality. In some cases, the photograph will be better because a skilled printer was used instead of the photographer with mediocre skills making his own print.

 

[bwrules]

No, I also agree. Photography is a complete package from previsualization to the mounting of the print. I don't know how a photographer can let someone else print his negatives. Only the photographer himself knows what he wants to say.

I think if a photogrpaher is prolific, it's possible to find a printer and teach him or her to print one's large output the way the photographer wants it with not much of a trade-off. In any case, that's what photographers do when their work gets published. They work closely with a publisher's printer to make sure they like the results. Same with sliver gelatin printing.

What one can't do is teach someone to have one's unique vision. Also one can't print or photoshop his or her way out of a bad or uninspiring photograph.

 

[Vaughn]

I recently saw an incredible large silver gelatin print of this Yousuf Karsh image:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...page=1&ndsp=13&ved=1t:429,r:4,s:0&tx=46&ty=43

From what I understand, Yousuf Karsh did not do his own printing -- but saw his work as a collaberation between himself, his studio assistants and his printer. Not the way I work, but I can see where this is a very valid way of working.

 

[Klainmeister]

What I mean by output is that trusting things like proper color/bw highlights, framing, etc and as well as archival properties. Having crap float around with your name on it and having it be a POS will still stick that reputation with you, and not the lab, printer, etc.