Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Re: Piezography - real print or not?
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 11:56:18 -0800
References: <B6CBB304.6497%alexpix@worldnet.att.net> <3AA65A4F.4A6C20F1@earthlink.net>

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/

Replies: Reply from S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] Re: Re: Piezography - real print or not?)
In reply to: Message from Steven Alexander <alexpix@worldnet.att.net> (Re: [Leica] Re: Re: Piezography - real print or not?)
Message from S Dimitrov <sld@earthlink.net> (Re: [Leica] Re: Re: Piezography - real print or not?)