Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: What do you call your Fine Art Inkjet Prints?  (Read 12183 times)
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 934


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 13, 2009, 06:25:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Here in México "Plata/gelatina" (Silver gelatin) is been the standard for decades for b&w darkroom photographs. "Impresion cromogénica" (Chromogenic print) for C color prints and "Cibachrome" for what else? Cibachrome.
Now with the digital prints is crazy and each individual photographer has to come with a ad-hoc name to describe the "technique".
I use Giclèe for pigments prints on cotton paper, "Ulltrachrome print" when I use a photographic Epson paper like P Luster. For my most recent B&W landscape photography I printed on Harman with an Epson 7880, so I used "Pigment on baryta".
During the last 4 years or so, "Piezografía" it's been popular among photographers in Mexico city (mainly) to describe a b&w print made with carbon pigments, but unluckily, many other photographers are using this term to describe any ink-jet b&w pigment print made with standard inks.
I never liked this term for 2 reasons. First: It describes the type of the printing head like in an Epson. If I follow suit should I call it "Thermography" if made with a Canon printer? No go in my opinion.  Second, Piezography is a commercial brand owned by John Cone, the first guy to come with a civilized carbon system to replace the then not so good inksets for b&w printing of 2004 (circa). The ABW controls in the latest Epson printers took care of that though a lot of photogs still prefer carbon inks.
I like "Pigment on paper"
Eduardo
« Last Edit: November 13, 2009, 06:28:01 PM by uaiomex » Logged
NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 14, 2009, 03:42:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Guigui
Let me add that although it's a French word, I strongly recommend not using the term "giclee" in France, since in slang we sometimes use it as a synonym of ejaculation.
Yes, and it might even be related to why I thought of Boris Vian's (which I knew first with Vercoquin et le Plancton when I was 15) song, apart from the illustration of the "snob" word.
Anyway I wouldn't think there were many people having heard of IRIS printers and the like at their time here in France, don't you think?

And by the way why not call inkjet prints... inkjet prints?
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
jule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738


WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 14, 2009, 04:11:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: NikoJorj
And by the way why not call inkjet prints... inkjet prints?
Because general fine art convention in any media requires the exact medium on the exact substrate. Inkjet ink can be dye or pigment ink. and papers can be all types of papers.... so for eg; pigment ink on cotton rag paper says it exactly how it is.

Julie
Logged

PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1590



WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 14, 2009, 05:08:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dave Gurtcheff
I went to a local museum, and saw a wonderful Photo Exhibit of B&W prints by a single photographer. Flush mounted uncropped traditional prints of all sizes (some from 35mm that were probably 20"x30"). Print quality was superb. Next to each print was the title, and "Silver Gelatin Print". I told my friends that was the "new word" for good old fashioned darkroom prints, that many of us made. I had a fully equipped darkroom for 50 years, and sold and exhibited  my traditional prints (both B&W and "C" prints). I have an opportunity to have an exhibit as well in the same museum. Apparently the Artist must specify the medium ("Oils on Canvas", "Silver Gelatin Print". etc). What do we call this new medium? "Digital Pigment Print"?? "Giclee Pigment Print", "Inkjet on Baryatta" (spelling?). I know there is possibly a snob appeal that would disfavor an ink jet print, but that aside, what have you called your work when faced with an important exhibit?
Thanks in advance      
Dave Gurtcheff
www.modernpictorials.com

I call them "unsold."
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
MHMG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


« Reply #24 on: November 14, 2009, 07:27:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Onsight
While "archival" was reassuring 10 years ago it's practically a given today.

Yes, if only it were true, if only it had a clear and concise meaning. It isn't, and it doesn't.

Logged
Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1287


WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 14, 2009, 07:38:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MHMG
Yes, if only it were true, if only it had a clear and concise meaning. It isn't, and it doesn't.
From the perspective of what you do I totally agree. As far as labeling prints and communicating to potential print buyers, ten years ago there was lots of uncertantity about the longivity of inkjet prints relative to silver gelatin prints. To say "Archival Pigment Print" today is redundant and excessive. "Pigment ink print on [whatever] paper" really says a lot today and communicates that it will last a long time.

But I hear you. The term "archival" is loaded and undefined and should be used with caution, if at all. All the better to leave it out in this context.
Logged

Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 974


WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 14, 2009, 08:28:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm sure we can all agree that the word "archival" is not particularly concise, but I think we can also agree that one year falls outside of the loosest definition of the word.  

I have a client that had a number of prints on canvas made over the last several years on an Epson 9600.  She is dealing with multiple clients that are asking for replacement prints due to ink fading.  Some of them are only a year old.  One or two of them might be attributable to a poor choice of display conditions, but I don't think that they could all be accused of displaying them in direct sunshine.  The client is an artist that had them shot, printed, clearcoated and stretched by a competitor of mine.  He is refusing to make good and the client is having to foot the bill herself to save face.  I don't know what exactly he did, but he allegedly used a third party inkset.  Fading issues are largely a non-issue these days, but not unheard of.  

I'm reprinting another group of paintings on canvas for a different client (who used a different competitor) that have patches of ink falling off of the face and edges.  Those are only about two years old.  

I'm going to employ the word "archival" at bit longer, at least.  Personally, I couldn't sleep at night worrying about untested materials and their longevity.  The cost savings aren't worth it.  I'm happy knowing that HP's R&D budget was well invested in terms of ink longevity.

BTW:  These were full color images, so I don't know what inkset might be at fault.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2009, 08:31:39 PM by Colorwave » Logged

MHMG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


« Reply #27 on: November 14, 2009, 09:01:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Onsight
From the perspective of what you do I totally agree. As far as labeling prints and communicating to potential print buyers, ten years ago there was lots of uncertantity about the longivity of inkjet prints relative to silver gelatin prints. To say "Archival Pigment Print" today is redundant and excessive. "Pigment ink print on [whatever] paper" really says a lot today and communicates that it will last a long time.

But I hear you. The term "archival" is loaded and undefined and should be used with caution, if at all. All the better to leave it out in this context.

It's not just ambiguity of the term archival I'm talking about. "Archival pigment print" sounds redundant only if you think all pigments and digital fine art papers are inherently stable. However,  using a pigmented ink on a lignin-free, acid-free "fine art" paper doesn't guarantee the print is automatically long lasting. Even if we benchmark the performance against well known traditional dye-based photographs like Fuji Crystal Archive paper some of those "archival pigment prints" aren't necessarily more durable.  For example, artists who like bright white fine art papers are choosing a paper that more often than not also contains a unique class of dyes. OBAs are dyes that just happen to fluoresce, but especially when concentrated in a microporous inkjet paper coating, those dyes can often become the weak link to the onset of noticeable visual changes in print quality as the print ages. They can be prematurely and significantl affected by both light fading and gas fading issues compared to the pigmented colorants. Because their initial presence in the paper affects not only paper color but also any highlight areas in the print, their loss of fluorescence will affect more than just the border white color of the paper.  And, although the major OEM pigmented inks are all reasonably robust on a wide variety of substrates, I've tested third party pigmented inks that are less stable than some dye-based systems. Hence, "pigment ink on cotton paper" simply doesn't guarantee the kind of durability that many people now believe can be taken for granted.  Even for the OEM pigments, paper chemistry can affect lightfastness, for example, by a factor of 3 or more, so the moral of the story is that for any artist who truly wants to provide a long lasting print and be able to speak confidently about choice of materials, one must make an informed choice when matching inks and papers. My advice to the cautious collector would be always to ascertain what printer, ink, paper, and possible coatings were used when purchasing a contemporary inkjet print. As we learn more about the long term performance of modern digital media, that knowledge of materials and processes used in the making of the art may become much more relevant as time goes by.
Logged
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1573


WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 15, 2009, 08:54:17 AM »
ReplyReply

I am very cautious about using the adjective "archival."  We must remember that all the data we have is from accelerated stability testing, not real time, and under controlled conditions.  The testing does not account for all the various conditions that a print might face in real life.  Regardless of what ink set or paper that we use, we cannot promise the prints to resist fading; all we can do is inform the purchaser about what inks were used (and other treatments of the surface as appropriate) and the presentation conditions that will maximize longevity.  It took a fair amount of time to understand all the chemical reactions in traditional photography and that we had to be meticulous about getting rid of the last traces of hypo.  We understood the limitations of color chemistry.  Finally, I don't think that any artist media (oil paints, water color, various sculpture materials) promise archival quality (I'm sure that non of the renaissance painters sold paintings labeled as "archival oil on canvas" or "special paint on fresco").  All we can do is state the facts and provide interested parties a link to the ongoing research.

I'm just happy when a view of my pigment print on cotton rag calls it a "nice picture."
Logged

Scott Martin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1287


WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 15, 2009, 09:14:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MHMG
although the major OEM pigmented inks are all reasonably robust on a wide variety of substrates, I've tested third party pigmented inks that are less stable than some dye-based systems. Hence, "pigment ink on cotton paper" simply doesn't guarantee the kind of durability that many people now believe can be taken for granted.
Yes, and that's also why "Archival Pigment print" doesn't guarantee longevity, and another reason to ditch the word "archival". Many people are making these prints from 3rd party inks on a  variety of papers (including those with OBAs). "Archival Pigment print" is becoming the new "Giclee" and is being used by those who put little thought into the process or specification of the process. So when I see a print labeled as "Archival Pigment print" I am suspicious and want to learn more. What kind of ink is it and what kind of paper? Again, "Archival Pigment print" is pretty generic, and subject to misunderstanding. I'll never forget when a photographer friend of mine printed his work on a dye based 8x10 inkjet printer in 2000 and called it a Giclee. To a more limited extent, it's happening again with "Archival Pigment print."

Quote from: MHMG
Even for the OEM pigments, paper chemistry can affect lightfastness, for example, by a factor of 3 or more, so the moral of the story is that for any artist who truly wants to provide a long lasting print and be able to speak confidently about choice of materials, one must make an informed choice when matching inks and papers. My advice to the cautious collector would be always to ascertain what printer, ink, paper, and possible coatings were used when purchasing a contemporary inkjet print. As we learn more about the long term performance of modern digital media, that knowledge of materials and processes used in the making of the art may become much more relevant as time goes by.
Well said. I have a client that made a feature out of the metamerism on his Epson 9500 prints. His eerie portraits were carefully lit and would appear to change color as the viewer moved around the room. Now that the inkset is long gone, these prints are becoming more precious/exotic and I can imagine collectors trying to describe metamerism to future generations.

"Pigment ink print on [whatever] paper" isn't a bad place to start when making labels for exhibition. When print sales are made, however, more detailed information about the print are in order. Inkset, paper, OBAs, coatings including brand names are all useful to the collector and become more interesting as time goes by.
Logged

dkeyes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 259


WWW
« Reply #30 on: November 16, 2009, 03:52:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Pigment Print.
I leave off the word "archival", since it is a subjective term. I see it done both ways in the museum and gallery world. (with and without "archival") I'll tell a client more about the paper, if asked, but don't label it that way because it's too much detail for me.

I think incorporating the name of the printer is just stupid. (Same goes for the use of the word "digital".) Akin to using the name of your paint brush for a painting.
Logged

MHMG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


« Reply #31 on: November 16, 2009, 04:26:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: dkeyes
Pigment Print.
I leave off the word "archival", since it is a subjective term. I see it done both ways in the museum and gallery world. (with and without "archival") I'll tell a client more about the paper, if asked, but don't label it that way because it's too much detail for me.

Yet there are historical print processes with vastly different underlying technologies such as tri-color carbro, collotypes, etc., that could also generically be called a "pigment print". Which begs the question: What is the aversion to calling an inkjet print made with pigmented inks a "pigmented inkjet print"? That would quickly allow the buyer to understand the true nature of the print production process, and its potential (although no guarantee) for longevity.  I suspect the term inkjet is being shoved under the bus because somehow "inkjet" has become associated with "cheap". Too bad. The fine art prints we are making with the latest inkjet technologies are impressive and inspiring on many levels. The term inkjet no longer deserves such second-class citizen status.

Logged
Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1573


WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 16, 2009, 05:31:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MHMG
I suspect the term inkjet is being shoved under the bus because somehow "inkjet" has become associated with "cheap". Too bad. The fine art prints we are making with the latest inkjet technologies are impressive and inspiring on many levels. The term inkjet no longer deserves such second-class citizen status.
I couldn't agree more.  I have a mini gallery of my pictures in the hallway at work.  The other day the admin to our boss was up on the floor and saw the pictures.  She couldn't beleive the quality and when I told her the came from an inkjet printer she was surprised.  Most people are only familiar with low end color printers that have at best four colors.  I'm pretty clear with foks that these come from a photostylus inkjet printer (I believe those are Epson's terms).
Logged

mas55101
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #33 on: November 19, 2009, 03:25:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dave Gurtcheff
I went to a local museum, and saw a wonderful Photo Exhibit of B&W prints by a single photographer. Flush mounted uncropped traditional prints of all sizes (some from 35mm that were probably 20"x30"). Print quality was superb. Next to each print was the title, and "Silver Gelatin Print". I told my friends that was the "new word" for good old fashioned darkroom prints, that many of us made. I had a fully equipped darkroom for 50 years, and sold and exhibited  my traditional prints (both B&W and "C" prints). I have an opportunity to have an exhibit as well in the same museum. Apparently the Artist must specify the medium ("Oils on Canvas", "Silver Gelatin Print". etc). What do we call this new medium? "Digital Pigment Print"?? "Giclee Pigment Print", "Inkjet on Baryatta" (spelling?). I know there is possibly a snob appeal that would disfavor an ink jet print, but that aside, what have you called your work when faced with an important exhibit?
Thanks in advance      
Dave Gurtcheff
www.modernpictorials.com

Depending on what printer/ink combination and what paper you're using,  you could say carbon pigment (in the case of color) or simply carbon (if that's true) on "name paper here."  Or if using something like Cone(?) ink you could say Dye on...

Mine are mostly "Carbon Pigment on Museo Silver Rag" or in some cases "Carbon on Premiere Smooth BW."

I don't like to use the word archival.

Michael
Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 974


WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 19, 2009, 03:30:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: mas55101
Depending on what printer/ink combination and what paper you're using,  you could say carbon pigment (in the case of color)...
Michael
I thought carbon was like Model T's, and only came in one color.  Black.
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad