so where does that leave its ‘artisanal’ future?
The goal is age. How you got there doesn't matter. There were thousands of painters a hundred and more years ago that decried photography because it wasn't real art. It takes just as much, albeit different, skills to make a top notch inkjet print.i have no idea how digital files and ink jet prints can be ultra artisanal maximum hand crafted like michealangelos work.
i guess it goes along the same lines as ink jet prints that require no light to make are more photographic than photographic prints ..
makes absolutely no sense unless by the same definition an artisanal hand crafted meal comes out of a nozzle...
All my cameras take film and all my radios have tubes. I have zero interest in digital, or any frequency not on my Hammarlunds. I can't stop others from participating in a technology that drives the very craft it was designed for into extinction, but not me.
The courts long ago settled the question of needing permission if one is in a public space. You don't.
Photography has always been evolving. I would say the big quantum leaps were:
From plates to flim
Reliable color with Kodachrome, ca. 1935
Digital
I agree Alan, it is all magic to me and I love it. The ability to capture a simple moment in time, no matter how it is done, and then present that for others to see keeps me coming back every day to see what happens next.Watching my first 4x6" print roll off my home color printer was amazing to me as was the first time I saw a photo on a flat screen monitor having only used CRT's previously. It was also amazing. While I only wet printed once in my life 50 years ago, and that was amazing too, I find all these methods very magical. I used to watch BW TV on a 17" 480 line screen. Now I have a 75" color screen with 2160 vertical lines to also display photo slides better, IMO, than the slide projector I used to use. Today, I shoot MF film and take digital pictures with an amazing Sony P&S still and video camera. It;s all good. It's all amazing.
The goal is age. How you got there doesn't matter. There were thousands of painters a hundred and more years ago that decried photography because it wasn't real art. It takes just as much, albeit different, skills to make a top notch inkjet print.
I assume you’re just referring to USA? I imagine there are places where it’s not permitted.
It;s all good. It's all amazing.
I would have added masked color negative film to your list. This was a major part of the evolution of photography, making possible easy to produce high quality color prints and motion pictures for the world for decades, that would not have been possible without it.
Good digital work is ultra-artisanal and maximum hand crafted...much like Michaelangelo's work, most of which was crafted not by his hand, but by intelligent intermediaries on the finest possible media...no mere junque and no limits in SIZE.
Built-in masking of color negatives should not be considered "lesser". As I indicated earlier it made possible high quality color photography that would not have been as easily produced without it. An elegant solution we all benefited from to major problem--dealing with dye impurities. A big evolutionary and revolutionary step that is too often overlooked. Kodachrome was not as important to the world of color photography as masked negatives.There are a number of big evolutionary leaps that I considered, but I wanted to keep it to the most basic and transforming. Other lesser ones, like masking, might be the 35mm and smaller formats, Polaroids, the SLR, minilabs, things like that.
What is a substantial minority in terms of percentage? What is the source of your data?A substantial minority of inkjet printer users mixes their own pigments....
Built-in masking of color negatives should not be considered "lesser". As I indicated earlier it made possible high quality color photography that would not have been as easily produced without it. An elegant solution we all benefited from to major problem--dealing with dye impurities. A big evolutionary and revolutionary step that is too often overlooked. Kodachrome was not as important to the world of color photography as masked negatives.
...In New Mexico Museum of Art in Santa Fe, I enjoyed a wonderful inkjet print, maybe 2'X3', made with oak-gall dye (familiar to weavers) used as pigment, printed on a very rough hand-made paper from Nepal.
So you say. I am sure glad that all these years yours has not been the opinion of the movers and shakers in the photographic world.My opinion, your opinion.
I say potato, you say potawto.
There is no objective answer.
It may be a silly word, but it's an accurate appraisal of the place formally mainstream industries occupy. If you want to use film, you're not going to walk down the high street and pick the prints up at the end of your lunch break. Beer used to be made by mega-corps in breweries that dominated a whole block. Now the stuff you buy in supermarkets probably came from an old cow shed or industrial unit on a trading estate. Music recording headed the same way.No one used the word "artisinal" until a relative few years ago. It's so overused I could puke. Coming soon to a gas pump near you: artisinal gasoline.
I'm not so sure I would call Kodak and Fujifilm artisinal. And film is being processed and prints are being made using the same machines being used years ago. There are just not as many of them. Not much change other than volume.It may be a silly word, but it's an accurate appraisal of the place formally mainstream industries occupy. If you want to use film, you're not going to walk down the high street and pick the prints up at the end of your lunch break. Beer used to be made by mega-corps in breweries that dominated a whole block. Now the stuff you buy in supermarkets probably came from an old cow shed or industrial unit on a trading estate. Music recording headed the same way.
Artisan, boutique, bespoke, lo-fi, call it what you like, film is a medium of the margins. Making pictures with it is a mostly homespun activity.
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?