Welcome to the second instalment of the Conversations between myself and Lloyd Chambers of the excellent site Diglloyd: today, we’re talking about printing. Background: in September, we managed to shoot together for a day at the Purisima Creek redwoods – the image above is the print we’re referring to and one I made that afternoon, and the location is one that’s familiar to Lloyd. It was my first time there. Following feedback from the first instalment, we’ve edited the conversation to make it a little more readable; again it will be posted on both our sites.
I was discussing printmaking with one of the regulars readers of this site recently when a thought struck me: one of the biggest turning points for me personally was when I started shooting with an eventual printability objective for all of my images. This happened around early 2012, before which I’d felt I was stagnating creatively somewhat – perhaps partially due to day job commitments (this was before I turned to photography full time) and partially because well, I didn’t have an output objective.
The comparison. This is your field of view at about a foot and a half viewing distance of the crops, which are 10″ high each. Larger version here.
Today’s post is an attempt to do try to convey just how much of a difference there is between an Ultraprint and what would be considered a normal, very good print. Since this is really impossible without seeing the prints in person, a direct comparison is perhaps the closest I can get when working via the internet. What you see here will come as no surprise to people who’ve bought the most recent one or two Ultraprints from Forest III onwards; however, things have moved on a bit since then.
A gentle reminder: today is the last day to order an Ultraprint from Edition 2. Once the order period is closed, the images will never be reprinted in this format. Click here to order or for more information. Thanks! MT
Everybody loves cars, and especially old cars. And Havana – well, it’s full of them, in various states of repair; a veritable photographic paradise. The mixture of textures, colours, shapes and an elegance of an age past make for some very interesting images indeed. The selection of cars may appear random, but those participants who were with me on the Havana Masterclass will know that there was often quite a lot of waiting involved for just the right car to come along to complement the scene and mood.
Following the success of the previous run, it is therefore my pleasure to open the next limited edition Ultraprint run for orders: The Cars of Havana. Read on for details, and to buy.
The final article in this series on printing leaves behind the technique and even the images to consider a far deeper philosophical consideration: art vs. the process vs. the result. To make a successful image, there are three primary considerations: the idea, the execution, and the display medium. Most photographers struggle to manage more than one of these – there are a lot of people who are very good at shooting brick walls and test charts and can remember ever single custom function of their cameras, but cannot compose at all. Similarly, there are a lot of people who point and shoot with their phones but are quite gifted compositionally; yet they are frustrated by their inability to capture what they imagine. And both groups almost never think about how the finished work is to be presented and viewed.
What you are seeing is not a capture or printing error. The irregular inner concave surface of the moon is due to variations in depth from craters; the moon itself is in the very extremes of Zone X in the actual image, yet there is still tonal separation present in the print.
Following on from my earlier article on pushing print limits, I’d like to show you the fruits our labour: the Ultraprint. I think the above image pretty much says it all: that is a photograph of the actual print, with a ruler for comparison. Scale markings are in millimetres, as shown.