--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "culturalvisions" <frank@c...> wrote: > I've tried the waxes with my platinum and silver prints and was > not impressed, but that could have been the photographs' > problem. Speaking of wax, I'll relay a depressing story: I went out to this gallery yesterday afternoon and saw this show with my prints. I'll get to my prints later.... But this one guy did oil on canvas, and then he "dipped" the whole framed print, maybe 8x10", into I assume, a vat of wax. It was super thick built up, maybe a quarterinch or halfinch thick, but you could still see the image very plainly; it was not milky. They were gorgeous. Mine seemed to suffer from metamerism. They were too magenta. From now on, I think I'll take a Minolta color meter to the gallery and read the light, and then duplicate that somehow in my office, in order to judge the print in its intended space. (They were made with Gen4 pigments). Secretly, in the last two days, I've been printing on MediaStreet canvas, and I"m LOVING it. I'm applying ageing varnish onto the canvas, and it takes two thick coats, but it's very pretty. I love the idea of NOT having to baby the surface, like you do with standard photo paper. My rep hates it, because I'm drifting off into "starving artist" mentality, and playing 80's Ramones music, and not showering. (Should I "up" my medication?) The image I'm printing I stuck on the front of my site: http://marktucker.com .
Message
Re: Beyond the name: selling prints/print quality of old vs new
2001-12-05 by mtucker508
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.