Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => User Critiques => Topic started by: LizardKing on March 12, 2013, 12:54:44 am

Title: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: LizardKing on March 12, 2013, 12:54:44 am: 1
(http://www.sergeychubarov.ru/files/57/78/71/01/lg_27513911_643_HB_120602_EfkeIR_003_Lith1.jpg)

2
(http://www.sergeychubarov.ru/files/7f/78/71/01/lg_27513951_266_Y_100612_RolleiIR_10_Lith2.jpg)

3
(http://www.sergeychubarov.ru/files/89/78/71/01/lg_27513961_274_H_100627_Rollei_IR_10_Lith2.jpg)

4
(http://www.sergeychubarov.ru/files/93/78/71/01/lg_27513971_263_H_100612_Rollei_IR_01_Lith1.jpg)

5
(http://www.sergeychubarov.ru/files/9d/78/71/01/lg_27513981_266_Y_100612_RolleiIR_08.jpg)
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: shutterpup on March 12, 2013, 09:15:40 am: #4 has a really neat Goth feel.
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: John R Smith on March 14, 2013, 02:59:05 pm: These prints (and the previous set) are really lovely. From the lack of response, though, we might guess that pictorialism of this sort is still well out of fashion, at least amongst the LuLa fraternity. I don't think that would bother me too much.

What I would do is find a gallery owner who likes the genre and feels that he or she could sell it, and market this style for all it was worth. Print them in limited editions, and take advice on framing and presentation. I know you could do it here in Cornwall, I'm not so sure whether that's the case where you work.

Hell, I'd like one on my wall . . .

John
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: Iluvmycam on March 14, 2013, 04:00:06 pm: Some nice ones, exp 4.

But too rough for me. Look like they are scans from a cheap newspaper pix. If that is what your after you did it. Spec effects are ok, just don't like ones that look cheap.
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: LizardKing on March 15, 2013, 01:10:37 am: Quote from: John R Smith on March 14, 2013, 02:59:05 pm
These prints (and the previous set) are really lovely. From the lack of response, though, we might guess that pictorialism of this sort is still well out of fashion, at least amongst the LuLa fraternity. I don't think that would bother me too much.

What I would do is find a gallery owner who likes the genre and feels that he or she could sell it, and market this style for all it was worth. Print them in limited editions, and take advice on framing and presentation. I know you could do it here in Cornwall, I'm not so sure whether that's the case where you work.

Hell, I'd like one on my wall . . .

John

Thank you John!
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: LizardKing on March 15, 2013, 01:12:47 am: Quote from: iluvmycam on March 14, 2013, 04:00:06 pm
Some nice ones, exp 4.

But too rough for me. Look like they are scans from a cheap newspaper pix. If that is what your after you did it. Spec effects are ok, just don't like ones that look cheap.

Thank you!
I think #4 is the best in set... -)
I'm not so sure that "Spec effects" looks cheap, sorry...
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: William Walker on March 15, 2013, 05:08:17 am: Quote from: John R Smith on March 14, 2013, 02:59:05 pm
pictorialism of this sort

John

John, I think Russ also used the term in an earlier "LK" post.

Is it the process that makes this "pictoralism" or is it the subject matter? The reason I ask is that when similar subject matter is posted in "normal" processing, no-one mentions "pictorialism".

William
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: John R Smith on March 16, 2013, 08:25:12 am: Quote from: W. Walker on March 15, 2013, 05:08:17 am
John, I think Russ also used the term in an earlier "LK" post.

Is it the process that makes this "pictoralism" or is it the subject matter? The reason I ask is that when similar subject matter is posted in "normal" processing, no-one mentions "pictorialism".

William

William, it is the process, which in this case (lith printing) lies with the use of a particular media (other than a silver print). You can get similar results by other means than lith printing, though, and they would still be an example of pictorialism. Adams and Weston were largely responsible for the decline of pictorialism with their promotion of highly-detailed, precisely etched silver prints which then were seen as having an artistic quality of their own. Both photographic approaches and their resulting prints could be of exactly the same subject - landscape, portrait, still life, whatever.

John
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: RSL on March 16, 2013, 10:03:23 am: John's right on the money. The difference between pictorialism and straight photography is the difference between strained emotionalism and critical seeing. For the absolute pinnacle of pictorialism see the photograph "Fading Away" by Henry Peach Robinson. He executed this atrocity in 1858 using five negatives. So much for the "unbelievability" of photographs post-processed in Photoshop.
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: John R Smith on March 16, 2013, 11:54:23 am: Quote from: RSL on March 16, 2013, 10:03:23 am
. . . For the absolute pinnacle of pictorialism see the photograph "Fading Away" by Henry Peach Robinson. He executed this atrocity in 1858 using five negatives.

You will note, William, that I did previously mention that pictorialism seems to be somewhat out of favour these days ;)

John
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 16, 2013, 12:10:21 pm: Quote from: RSL on March 16, 2013, 10:03:23 am
... So much for the "unbelievability" of photographs post-processed in Photoshop.

Pre-photoshop manipulation was the case of exceptions proving the rule. Those exceptions rule today.
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: William Walker on March 16, 2013, 05:37:04 pm: John and Russ,

Thank-you for that!

William
Title: Re: Lith-prints again, thank you!
Post by: Roberto Frieri on March 17, 2013, 09:08:15 am: All very nice.
The second image is the one I prefer.
Many compliments.