Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mark: You're right, that's the minimum, good lab methodologies are a basic standard. But as evidenced by current and past practices, the work that will be sought out by future generations will probably come from the society's peripheries. A thankless task when ephemeral end product rules the day there. Also, the attention to technical details, such as what you have described, are seriously limited by economic strictures. In particular, when times are tough, artist and photographers skimp to make ends meet. Lastly, lab proficiency is a mannerism from another era that is barely relevant at the moment. All of that has a cumulative effect in the final product's archival properties. But is that necessarily bad when the usage of a material with all its technical dependencies is often a helpful marker for the historian. Besides, we can't presume that what we generate will be of value to our posterity. More often than not, it's not. With that, frankly, I don't see why we have to worry one way or another about longevity of a print. We use the materials as they are available. It is more incumbent on the conservator to develop techniques that will address this problem, than it is to us who generate the print. Slobodan Dimitrov Mark Rabiner wrote: > > S Dimitrov wrote: > > > > The definitions are simple. With a vintage print, you're usually dead > > and that's the term the scavengers, sorry I meant investors, use for > > your work. It implies that it was printed during the time of your > > creative vibrancy. What really makes these prints worth so much, is that > > they are done at the expense of eating and paying the rent and on an > ><Snip> > > You don't want a bunch of hype ridden prints giving off fumes all around the > place though. > They'll eat everything in site, your negs too! (the fumes that is) > Very few of my prints seem to have been underwashed or underfixed I can see. > Which is good becuae there are tons of them and the whole house would stink and > the carpets would fade. > > Mark Rabiner > Portland, Oregon > USA > > http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/