Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/02/09

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

Subject: [Leica] Does the process matter?
From: don.dory at (Don Dory)
Date: Sat Feb 9 19:06:11 2008
References: <DC4B73A4105FCE4FAE0CEF799BF84B36013F2041@case-email> <>

Philippe,This an area that I have been following for years.  The museums
have been looking for a quality reproduction method to sell in the museum
shop and the heirs of the artist are looking for an income stream.  Yes, the
best of the reproductions are dead on the original with the exception of
some greens and blues that are still out of gamut.  As to the texture, some
of the paper has a good texture that will mimic an oil.

On Feb 9, 2008 11:36 AM, Philippe AMARD <> wrote:

> The oil painting will still be there in a couple hundred years, the
> print might simply not.
> And visually, I can't believe oil on canvas and prints can be confused;
> did you get close enough? what was the light like inside the hall?
> Really surprising
> Best
> phx
> David Rodgers wrote:
> >Brian,
> >
> >
> >
> >>>... what he showed me made me realize that the very best inkjet prints
> >>>
> >>>
> >were now on an aesthetic par with the very best silver halide prints,
> >and that I didn't *need* to conquer Xtol.<<
> >
> >I was in a gallery the other day. There were two large framed paintings.
> >They looked identical to me. One was priced $850. The other $5,000. One
> >was the original oil painting. The other was an inkjet copy. The copy
> >was on textured paper that made it look like an oil painting.
> >
> >I studied the original and copy closely. Again, I couldn't tell a
> >difference, though granted know nothing about oil painting. But there
> >obviously was a difference in value. I'm not sure how, or even if this
> >relates to silver vs an inkjet printing. But it does remind me value
> >isn't always based on aesthetics. Methods and materials are important.
> >
> >I also recall being in a gallery in Carmel years ago. There was a large
> >bw print. It was a "giclee" print, somewhat rare at the time. The
> >gallery was hyping that and it was expensive. Now silver prints are
> >becoming the rarity. I don't want to read too much into that. But is
> >aesthetics the only thing that's important, or does the process matter?
> >
> >DaveR
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Leica Users Group.
> >See for more information
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See for more information


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] Does the process matter?)
Reply from philippe.amard at (Philippe AMARD) ([Leica] Does the process matter?)
In reply to: Message from drodgers at (David Rodgers) ([Leica] Does the process matter?)
Message from philippe.amard at (Philippe AMARD) ([Leica] Does the process matter?)