Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/17

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Sebastiao Salgado exhibition
From: "Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 09:09:56 -0800
References: <3BF62CCC.38FF181B@iamerica.net>

Leslie E. England wrote:
>>>     I was under the impression exhibitions demanded 16x20 enlargements.
> Having just bought a new easel and spent the extra money for the 16x20
size in case it ever comes up, I was curious.  Is 16x20 a preference by
galleries and not a demand?  Is the decision the photographer's?  Why 16x20,
anyway?  <<<<<

Hi Lee,
I don't think the gallery has any call on the print size, I imagine some do,
but any exhibitions I've had or where my work was hung in a collection with
other photographers, the size was the prerogative of the photographer.

As far as 16X20 size?  .... it may have something to do with the size of
paper available to printing the full uncropped 35mm frame.

I'm sure your money for the 16X20 easel is well spent as they rarely wear
out and who knows someday your work maybe in high demand, if it isn't
already, and hopefully you'll wear it out filling the orders for prints. :-)

>>>Is Salgado allowed to pick his own size because of his fame?  Is he
saying his Leitz lenses and TriX won't stand a 16x20 enlargement? <<<<<

He probably prints any size he wishes as many others do.  As far as Leica
created negatives not standing up to a 16X20 enlargement they surely do that
very well. Either from colour / B&W negs or slides. They'll stand up to
30-40 inches without a problem and much larger.

There's a medical complex in Phoenix, Arizona where images from my book on
the medical profession hang in their board room, the prints were made from
Tmax 35mm rated at 800, developed in Tmax developer 6 minutes at 75 degrees.
All shot by available existing light  and the prints are measured in feet,
like 5' X 5' and bigger not inches. It's just breathe taking to walk in
there and see them on the wall displayed at such a size..

What some folks don't understand is, the larger the blow-up, the greater
distance you view it from. The enlargement size dictates the viewing
distance and in the case of the board room it's extremely large, therefore
the viewing distance to print size is part of the magic of making them look
good..

Obviously if you make a 35mm print 4 feet by 8 feet you are going to need to
stand back the proportionate distance to view it correctly.

Will you see grain? Most certainly if you stand a foot or two away, common
sense dictates that. However stand back the correct distance and the print
looks
gorgeous, or at least it should.

>>If you thought a potential shot might be in an exhibition one day should
you
> pull out a Rollei?<<<<<<

I suppose some think that way, but if that were the case would Salgado or
HCB each time they shot some thing they felt would be an exhibition
situation, have used a camera of  larger format than a Leica? Besides you
really don't think that way when shooting as a photojournalist.

Possibly if one is shooting fine art material like rocks, ferns and
non-breathing things with peeling paint, then they might believe every shot
has potential for an exhibition and would be shooting with that in mind.
Ergo, larger format or extremely slow film if using 35mm.

Whereas the photojournalist / documentary photographer is concentrating on
the moment of life he or she is hopefully capturing on film and not future
exhibitions.

I hope this answers some of your questions.
ted

Ted Grant Photography Limited
www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "Leslie E. England" <engl6914@iamerica.net> ([Leica] Sebastiao Salgado exhibition)