Bob_Maxey@mtn.3com.com
Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:11:44 -0700
>>I find it very interesting that when it comes to photographs people are
>>always talking about archival qualities, archival processing, and
permanance
>>issues, yet in the other art media I rarely hear anyone ask if a painting
or
>>a sculpture piece is archival . It seems that we photogs need to keep
>>proving our merits to help be accepted as an art form by adding the
>>permanence label.
Good point. Not every image needs to be archival. Not every picture is
worth saving, and in this day of digital, why bother? Why the He## should I
spend all this time and effort looking for archival Ink-Jet inks when it is
clear to most right thinking people that the changes in printing technology
that will occur over the next 3-5 years will force us into reprinting the
images anyway.
I maintained a large collection of photographs here in Utah, going back to
1890. Everyone thinks every image is cool and wonderful, but the fact is,
many of them were not worth all of the attention. Simple record shots at
best.
I think the need for archival storage is there, but certainly not a
requirement for every photograph. After all, if this is such a concern, the
best thing you can do is make separations of your color images and process
them with care. Then it becomes possible to recreate the color image if
needed.
RM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:45