as
what is now called an analog printer, i
have been dealing with digital photography since its beginning. from
my experience, the two blend together really well, i don't feel like
one process is better than another. any way to make an image should
help the final print, projection, or on-screen visualization. i shot
film when i started because that was the norm: you'd buy film, expose
it, and process it in your bathroom, print it in a make-shift
darkroom. very much like young photographers today have an inkjet
printer attached to their computer. technology changes and more and
more people can make images. as a printer i do my part to make sure
the craft and quality of the prints are always questioned.
photography has been a hobby to many people since the kodak brownie,
since then the technology is available to anyone, so the craft needed
for its art form deserves a certain je-ne-sais-quoi, a higher
standard to start, meaning the machines are only as good as their
operators. and i have to know if the print i am being asked to make
as a silver gelatin wouldn't look better with another process. be it
pigment or pop print, what always matters to me is the final print.
i like it as an object.
anyway.
so
when i started to use photoshop, it felt pretty natural. i knew the
vocabulary, i had tools, even though some were rather rusty at first,
now they can do more than i care to use. that's pretty incredible.
when i choose what film to use, i have a look in mind already.
shooting digital, i can preset histograms for any light i like. the
craft is in the understanding of the relationship between what you
want, and what the machine can do. i push the machine because i
always try to improve my style. with photoshop i have more time to
perfect the image, perhaps sometimes gone one step too far -we all
have- but in the darkroom i have a time restrain, i have a clock that
turns backwards, a timer that counts down, or up. i think studio
musicians can play the same tune in exactly the same amount of time,
each time. that's what i do as a darkroom technician, i follow -or
try and keep up- the tempo of the print. i dodge and burn in rhythm,
especially if i happen to make a dozen in a row of the same image.
on my screen i only have to do it once, i don't need a plan, a full
map of the dance in my head, i just move methodically with layers i
can use or not. i am able to see the image in so many ways at a
click of a button it's beautiful. the craft is in the pushing the
machine. in the darkroom, the contrast scales are my levels, i
combine them with the exposure and the development time like a curve.
i can add or reduce contrast on specific areas, crop, or correct the
perspective. the concepts are the same. the healing tool is my
spotting brush.
at
the end, we rarely look at images on the same screen as someone else,
we sometimes see the same prints with the same light. you just don't
know where the print will be displayed eventually. i just hope that
people light a print to see what they like, similar to how we set our
screens, we calibrate to a certain standard. too much or not enough
light can kill a black and white print, and color prints seem to want
to soak up any part of the spectrum floating around. digital color
retouchers work in ,basically, darkrooms. a visually clean
environment is most important to a sensitive eye.
when
i had only color paper available to me for my own color prints, i
would skip a lot of images because i didn't like the surface of a
c-print. i would hesitate before i would print because i didn't -and
still don't- like the feel of a c-print as an object. now, i can use
any paper i wish, with a number of different printing techniques. i
have been doing a lot more color work in the past 6 to 8 years than
ever before. digital photography has integrated itself into the
photo world as fast as any other changes before -how quick did the
dagguerreotype studios in new york disappear? we are a far cry from
the late 90's, when it was an accomplishment to convince a client to
even try. one of my first projects was to get film via fedex from
the cannes festival, all these celebrity pictures were processed in
new york, then we'd scan the negatives and email (sounds easy so far
in 2012) them as contact sheets to the magazine that night, they
would make their picks that we would print in new york... the first
inkjets were terrible, now they dominate the market, there must be as
many inkjet printing studios than there were daguerreotypes'... it
makes my silver prints that much more special. because all i really
need is a light bulb and a lens. no lens? a pinhole works just as
well. we all need to be able to at least make a coffee print on a
banana peel, and printing will be around forever...
No comments:
Post a Comment