Graflex.org

[troublemaker]

Hey GLenn,

I thought about them, A&I, but a friend of mine is currently working with a new lab here in Hollywood by the name of Pro One for a big architectural shoot. I saw thier work (very nice), have contacted them and I like the way they treated me, which seems to be half the battle. I need help, not a hassle, but that seems to be the case more often than not. So I asked, can I send up a couple transperencies for evaluation and recomendations, have a couple proofs sent down etc... "Oh certainly, go ahead and send up the film and you will enjoy working with our techs." No one else has suggested working with thier techs, perhaps they are monkey"s? They have a moderately priced custom C-Print, and also exhibit etc, at about average pricing compared to other labs. I will send them a couple 35mm slides on Velvia first and see what happens. I do not trust anyone with my larger stuff anymore until I see absolute proof and some example of quality and profesionalism. I have had two labs start out great only to flounder in sloppy land a couple months later. I know some pros are using this place, but we will see how they treat an upstart like myself, they say they want to promote new work. It is all sales to me until I see results and consistency. They have full digital and conventional services. It wont hurt to try a couple easy prints with a new place.
Have a nice evening,
Stephen

[djon]

...another interesting lab...I've not used it because I don't use labs any more, but the website's a lot more intelligent than I've seen elsewhere:

http://www.bestlab.com/sanmig09.html

They are a longtime enthusiast for Ilford papers. In Lab News the Lab Manager talks about about his decision to go with Kodak in view of Ilford's agonizingly slow movement toward the grave.

[glennfromwy]

Pro One, eh? Interesting. I would be very interested in how their work turns out. I am always looking for alternatives. Never hurts to know who's doing what. Thanks!

_________________
Glenn

"Wyoming - Where everybody is somebody else's weirdo"

[troublemaker]

I will let you know when I have some results and pass along what info I can.
I am sending you a private message...
regards,
Stephen

[frohnec]

When photgraphy was in its infancy I wonder if artists using canvas had the same discussion? Whether photography would destroy there beloved visual art.
As far as I know an artist can still get canvas.

[djon]

Yes, canvas will be available forever, though sooner or later it'll stop being cotton-based because that's a destructive crop.

In addition to competition from the newer, technology, the problem film faces is that it's the product of a smoke stack, rust belt economy: labor and materials intensive, heavy machinery, big factories, polluting.

I'm about to scan a bunch of lovely glass plates shot in the 1800s with the fine craftsman-made Kodak Pony Premo that's sitting on a shelf next to them...this specific Premo started with glass plates, went over to film, will have to revert to glass plates when film becomes unavailable in sheets (2010?)... unless I buy a medium format digital back, when they drop below $1000, which should be soon (the new Mamiya medium format 22MB back will only be $3000 or so, which means it'll less than half of that in several years.

Anybody can make glass plates at home...Graflexes and Premos will still be able to shoot silver emulsions when sheet film vanishes from most dealer shelves, in a couple of years.

[glennfromwy]

Artists vs photographers? Lets just say that the advent of photography almost started a war between the two groups and their advocates. In fact, photography wasn't accepted a an artistic medium for a very long time. Salons and museums would have nothing to do with it. They both, however, are still with us.

_________________
Glenn

"Wyoming - Where everybody is somebody else's weirdo"

[djon]

Non-artists played with camera obscuras, capturing images only in their brains, for centuries.

Painters worked directly from virtual field cameras (ie camera obscuras) long before anybody coated plates.

Film is/was simply another medium for capturing images, comparable to glass plates or digital backs.

[troublemaker]

I asked my mentor last night "have I been treated poorly by some in the photo workd because I have only been at this for a couple years, and because of being a quick study, am I some kind of a threat?" She suggested yes, but will have no more of my two year shpeel because she insists I have been looking at my world for over forty. This I must agree with, and in fact am trying to express the way I see things on film. I do not label myself an artisit nor even a photographer, but the previous comment seems to make it so. I want the images to speek for themselves as do others, posed, natural, advertising or any other form of visiual imagery. It has been told to me that I need to find my own niche in the art/photography world, and by that i think consistency, but I am not a consistent person and find I enjoy everything from landscape to portraits. I must at this time refuse to follow the rules and follow my vision accepted or not. I like what was said above, one can still get canvas.
In the mean time, one of the labs that had scanned my film has said they would like to work with my images some more and see if they can make the necessary corrections at no additional charge on my account. This according to the owner who has requested my film to be sent back. THey apologized for the lack of initial communicaition problems and now seem concerned with my business? I think the technician may have gotten a bit of heat for disregarding my work as I have been informed they had a meeting with everyone concerning my experience. Quality is definately an issue in this day and age.
ANyhow, just a follow on.
Regards,
Stephen

[djon]

That's wonderful news...

Here and there we can find people trying to do their very best as individuals, teams and companies. I just don't think many photo labs are still in the high-quality-image business.

Yesterday I emailed Support at an alternative source for dye for my Epson 3200. I'd noticed that their website didn't mention quality, so I asked if it rivaled Epson's.

The Support person emailed back immediatly that "no, it wasn't as good as Epson for photo applications." I'm astonished at the honesty and would make a point of dealing with this company if they ever do announce that they rival Epson (as you know, Epson is Seiko/Copal and is today's primary exhibition photo printmaking replacement for Kodak et al).

[djon]

...dye for my Epson 2200, not 3200...2200 is the printer, 3200 is a recent scanner model.

[troublemaker]

So you are saying Epson has surpased the Lightjet type prints. That in mind, Pro One offers an exhibition print called a "Chromira" Custom and exhibition, and also a Chromia direct to print which I believe is what we speoke of earlier in reference to the "Ultra Chrome". I doubt I here from that lab again after I told the owner I thought that initially thier work was fine, but that since last summer it had gotten sloppy.
In dealing with those that have suggested they will fix up my prints for me, I told them what i thought was good, and bad about them. I have seen what they can do with littel 35mm slides, and that's why I thought it a good idea to scan and digitally enlarge my 6x9 stuff. I fully intend to keep shooting film, but i like the idea of having my images archived in more than one media for future use, and the bonus is that once done, reprints ******* will be about a fourth or less than the cost of set up and making another C-Print or whatever from my film. And what if I want to submit images, I can make or have copies made of my stored image file etc...
regards,
Stephen

[djon]

No, I'm not saying Epson's Ultrachrome inkjet
surpasses Lightjet, though the best thing they both have going for them is the computer technology that drives them (eg Photoshop).

The two most amazing displays of color prints that I've ever seen were in one case Lightjet and in the other Epson Ultrachrome (as in the inexpensive Epson 2200.

The nice thing about the current inkjet technology is that it's well within the reach of serious amateur and professional photographers, both financially and technically. Lightjet technology is entirely out of the reach of individuals for both reasons.

Unfortunately Lightjet relies on color photo paper, which limits both the print's longevity and this technology's future as a medium. The hope was, of course, Ilford's Cibachrome, which virtually no lab printed well until Lightjet-like technology appeared...

Here's a link. I've never used them.

http://www.westcoastimaging.com/

[Henry]

I'm sure you understand that the use of any inks other than Epson's own branded proprietary inks will void your printer warranty, and if they foul up your print head you'll be up the crick. Also, I'll go out on a limb here and say that Epson inks and papers are the best for Epson printers. I've used only the dye-based Epson inks specified for my 1270, and only Epson papers, and the results are all I could ask and then some.

[djon]

Epson's warrenty is one concern, bigger concerns are reports that some of the "alternatives" actually DO clog inkjets.

It's reported that the large Epson dye carts (for the big new 4000 ?) can be decanted easily into a CIS system, saving tremendous ink dollars Vs the little carts. Initial cost would be about $300 for the CIS plus $$$ for the large carts. I'll wait for more people to take this leap and report on it before I do it myself.

Epson Enhanced Matte is as beautiful as any B&W silver matte IMO. But an interesting alternative (sometimes)is the warmer Museum Digital ( Inkjetart.com ). The warmth may make it more suitable than Enhanced Matte for portraits...and it's two-sided, which makes it an especially good paper when I'm stuck doing multiple test prints, trying to hone in on something difficult. I print it the same as Enhanced Matte. Epson encourages us to experiment with paper, so that's not any kind of warrenty problem

I am printing some last minute Christmas cards on a warm cream-colored, prefolded, torn-edge, soft Italian hand-made paper: Fabriano Medioevalis #206. You can get it online, but I got my first batch from an expensive stationary boutique. It's not capable of accurate color because it's too far from white (might be good for etching-looking B&W), but it feeds perfectly thru the printer...I've printed multiple passes by mistake and been staggered by the precision of overlay. I've scanned a pencil-written greeting, am printing that inside and a photo outside.

Try that with a Kodak product!