|
|
|
pachyderm
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:22:31 PM
Posts: 603,
Visits: 2,676
|
|
| Is print size important, or is it just something you consider an afterthought? I've been listening to a Podcast by Brooks Jensen about the issue of print size, and it got me to thinking, is print size important and is it tied to the type of print. Brooks talks about how he prefers small prints, but I notice that most of the prints he sees are B&W prints. I've also heard other B&W printers say they too prefer small prints. However, as a color landscape photographer, I love large prints. I have a fantastic print by our very own Rich Nelridge (naturephoto1) that sits behind my desk at home (so I can look at it as I work), which is a 16x20, and I can't imagine seeing this print in any smaller size. It would loose too much of its impact. Even my portfolio consists of prints that are a minimum of 11x14 (and I sometimes carry around a 20x24 print as well). I'm curious how others see this issue.
Robert M. Teague---------------------------------------------
Website: www.visionlandscapes.com
Blog: visionlandscapes.spaces.live.com
"Fujifilm remains true to its heritage and to the acknowledged superior image quality delivered by professional photographic film products." -- Fuji Press Release An old Hasidic story says we should wear a coat with two pockets in order to receive God's message. In one pocket, the message is: "You are nothing but one of billions of grains of sand in the universe." In the other, the message is: "I made the universe just for you."
|
|
|
|
|
lynx
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 10/12/2008 9:27:13 AM
Posts: 24,
Visits: 153
|
|
I don't have a preference either way. To me, I think some prints scream to be large and some don't. I can't really say that I think whether it's color or b/w makes a difference to me. I do, however think that some large prints I've seen really shouldn't be as large as they are. Clyde Butcher comes to mind. I like his work, I've heard him speak at the College of William and Mary while they had dozens of his prints showing and I really think that his biggest prints are too big.
It's funny you should bring this topic up. I was just getting ready to start a project of VDB printing some MF negatives (6x7 cm). I think that for prints this small I will need to take a different approach to making my negatives than if I were planning to enlarge them.
_______________________________
Travis Nunn - Wannabe Photographer
|
|
|
|
|
pachyderm
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:22:31 PM
Posts: 603,
Visits: 2,676
|
|
Travis Nunn (4/11/2008)
It's funny you should bring this topic up. I was just getting ready to start a project of VDB printing some MF negatives (6x7 cm). I think that for prints this small I will need to take a different approach to making my negatives than if I were planning to enlarge them.Hmmm.... perhaps Jorge can give you some tips on this. I know he does a lot of contact printing, which is mostly small sizes.
Robert M. Teague---------------------------------------------
Website: www.visionlandscapes.com
Blog: visionlandscapes.spaces.live.com
"Fujifilm remains true to its heritage and to the acknowledged superior image quality delivered by professional photographic film products." -- Fuji Press Release An old Hasidic story says we should wear a coat with two pockets in order to receive God's message. In one pocket, the message is: "You are nothing but one of billions of grains of sand in the universe." In the other, the message is: "I made the universe just for you."
|
|
|
|
|
lion
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 10/7/2008 8:22:47 PM
Posts: 126,
Visits: 321
|
|
Unfortunately in our modern society where bigger is always better (can I super size that print for you?) it appears to sell much you need to make at least 40 inch prints. I understand even Bruce Barnbaum who has always maintained he would only print a particular neg at a specific size and refuse any amount of money to do otherwise is now making large prints.
In our local "fine art photography" gallery only really big prints are selling on a regular basis. It sucks as it seems the buyers have this beamer mentality where they just want something flashy and gaudy to show off how rich they think they are.
These comments obviously do not apply to recognized photographers like Weston et al who only contact printed. The people who shell out big bucks for his prints do so for a number of reasons. Many of which have nothing to do with art appreciation.
I guess it depends on whether you want to appeal to the lowest common denominator and sell or hold to your guns and create art while starving. Just MHO.
Eric (the starving artist)
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Eric Rose
Website:www.ericrose.com
|
|
|
|
|
lion
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 6/7/2008 2:49:31 PM
Posts: 135,
Visits: 324
|
|
Travis Nunn (4/11/2008)
I don't have a preference either way. To me, I think some prints scream to be large and some don't. I can't really say that I think whether it's color or b/w makes a difference to me. I do, however think that some large prints I've seen really shouldn't be as large as they are. Clyde Butcher comes to mind. I like his work, I've heard him speak at the College of William and Mary while they had dozens of his prints showing and I really think that his biggest prints are too big.
It's funny you should bring this topic up. I was just getting ready to start a project of VDB printing some MF negatives (6x7 cm). I think that for prints this small I will need to take a different approach to making my negatives than if I were planning to enlarge them.
Travis, just for grins I started carrying my hassy in my car and taking pictures for contact printing. I found that the best conposition was of simple subjects, anything that has too much detail gets lost in a contact print of this size, but a little 6x6 well done is a jewel.
As to print size, I have heard people say it matter, some that depending on the subject it matters, and some that don't. In my case I feel that size is important for the particular subject, things with a lot of detail (like landscapes) usually look better big, as if yo could walk into the print, those that have simple or minimal components looks better small IMO. I don't think a Michael Kenna print would look as good in a 6ftx10ft as it does in 6in.
|
|
|
| | |