Re: [Leica] Just a thought

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Close....My point is that what collectors are collecting - on the whole - is photography, work by noted photographers, NOT examples of printing technology. As digital printing matures, and as it becomes the standard  -  and it will - it will be just as collectible as "silver"
prints are - because the collectible photographers will be printing digitally...

B. D.

Paul Chefurka wrote:

> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Martin Howard [mailto:howard.390@osu.edu]
> >Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 2:04 PM
> >To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> >Subject: Re: [Leica] Just a thought
> >
> >
> >B. D. Colen jotted down the following:
> >
> >> And by the way, just for the record, what are being snatched
> >up by collectors
> >> are not "silver prints," but prints of work by certain
> >established and
> >> collectible photographers who have always printed in the
> >"traditional" manner.
> >>
> >Maybe I'm missing something here, but doesn't "silver prints" refer to
> >"silver gelatin" printing, i.e., printing in the "traditional" manner?
>
> I understood B.D.'s point to be that it wasn't the technology that buyers were most concerned with, but rather the author of the work (and yes, I understand that this debatable).  The implication is that an "interesting" artist's work would be purchased even if it were inkjet.
>
> The fact is that inkjet photo printing hasn't been around long enough for many its practitioners to be deemed collectible artists.  Those photographers who are considered collectible tend to be the old dogs who haven't learned this new trick yet.
>
> Paul