Re: dye sublimation prints

Joseph O'Neil (joneil@multiboard.com)
Fri, 20 Mar 1998 07:09:57 +0000

At 23:33 19/03/98 -0600, you wrote:
>I have these questions:
>
>I assumed that alternative photographic enthusiasts were primarily
>enthusiasts, hobbyists or academics. Is anyone making a living at this
>other than those providing services to hobbyists or teaching? My own
>interest comes from curiosity and the appeal of the non-commercial.
>
Hi Bill;
Although photography is not a full time job with me, I do have a company
on the side I incorporated for my photography, so yes I do try and make
some money from it.

How I am becomming interested in alt-processes is because of the computer.
Let me explain my situation. I do a lot of desktop publishing, scanning,
etc. The big, big, problem I am finding is now that flatbed scanners are
so cheap anymore, everybody who has even the slightest interest in any
computer art/digital imaging buys one.

I have a terrible time anymore explaining or justifying to people my
costs. You see, everyone has a home computer, and people do not realize
orrefuse to accept:
- that my top of the line (when I obught it) HP scanner is still superior
to the average $150 scanner sold in discout outlets;
- that no matter the technology, it still takes skill & talent to properly
retouch a picture;
- that my HP laserjet is very different fromt he average inkjt.

Bit problem is while inkjets are great for one or two prints, try
porducing 500 copies commercially. Just does not work. But people do not
understand this. Everyone who has a computer in their house thnks they are
on equal footing with you.

And then, when you do bust your butt cleaning up some terrible picture for
an hour in photo shop, the most common thing you hear back form people is
not "thanks" but "can't you make her look thinner?", or something like that.

So, the farther away form traditinal photography I get, the more valuble
my work becomes in some circles. Still have a long way to go to make a
ling at it.

I also feel, despite the advancement in point & shoots, tha the quiltiy of
work comming out of most 1 hour labs is very poor. There are some good
ones around, and that is usually reflected int he price of processing. But
th eodd time I have used a "wal-mart" type photo finisher, my photos look
like crap. The weird thing is I am able to produce better lookign results
on my 40 year old enlarger witha croppy ole Wollensack enlarging lens than
most hour labs seem willing to do.

I think therefore part of the attraction of the home computer is people
are simply out of touch of how a good photogrpah should look. I am not
talking aobut the artisitic ability of taking photogrpahs, but the
technical ability to produce them.

I hear what you are saying about people who make a living having to move
into photoshop, but from my limited expereince I am finding it is a double
edged sword, taking away as much as it gives.
joe

http://www.multiboard.com/~joneil
B&W, Large Format Images From Southern Ontario