Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 22 Feb 2012 (Wednesday) 22:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

It won't be noticeable on the print

 
Andrew_WOT
Goldmember
1,418 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Location: CA
     
Feb 22, 2012 22:28 |  #1

The phrase seldom used here, wondering how many still print in the digital age?
I have pretty good Epson photo printer but don't see much point of printing when I can view and share all my photos on computer, digital frame, tablet or online.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,806 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 874
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Feb 22, 2012 22:39 |  #2

Uggg. Noooooo. Ahhhhhh.

You need to shoot, process and print film, then appreciate digital ;). Printing your own work is soooo gratifying. To me it is the only 'real' image. I mean I can send you an image, but I have no idea how it looks to you (OK, that's an exaggeration). A print is something tangible.

And it's sooo nice to be able to produce something you like without having to spend 2 days in a darkroom or putting up with whatever you get from the store.

But, yea, I'm 40, still old school and I suspect you are not in the minority. I think for anyone that habitually took photos and sent them in for 5x7 prints that they stored and shared, it doesn't really make any sense to print your own. I did that for a while after loosing access to a darkroom and then lost interest. We have a few color family snaps, but not much.

However, I only got back into photography when digital allowed me to do what I wanted (I wasn't going back to B&W film + processing) so I can't imagine not printing, even if it doesn't always get hung on a wall.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mafoo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,503 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Dec 2011
     
Feb 22, 2012 23:29 |  #3

The funny thing, is I think in some ways it matters more.

No longer do I really print 5x7's, as the use for those photos (to help preserve memories) is now taken care of by the 7 thousand photos on my phone.

However, it's very easy now for me to print a large image for my wall, or a good size photo book for my family, that before the modern services I would never have done.

So for 95% if my images, it matters less. For the other 5%, it matters a lot more.


-Jeremy
5D Mk II | SL1 | 24-105 f4.0L IS | 70-200 f2.8L IS | S35 1.4 | 40 2.8 Pancake | Samyang 14 2.8 | 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
steelhead77
Member
79 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2011
     
Feb 23, 2012 01:01 |  #4

ejenner wrote in post #13948281 (external link)
Uggg. Noooooo. Ahhhhhh.

You need to shoot, process and print film, then appreciate digital ;). Printing your own work is soooo gratifying. To me it is the only 'real' image. I mean I can send you an image, but I have no idea how it looks to you (OK, that's an exaggeration). A print is something tangible.

And it's sooo nice to be able to produce something you like without having to spend 2 days in a darkroom or putting up with whatever you get from the store.

But, yea, I'm 40, still old school and I suspect you are not in the minority. I think for anyone that habitually took photos and sent them in for 5x7 prints that they stored and shared, it doesn't really make any sense to print your own. I did that for a while after loosing access to a darkroom and then lost interest. We have a few color family snaps, but not much.

However, I only got back into photography when digital allowed me to do what I wanted (I wasn't going back to B&W film + processing) so I can't imagine not printing, even if it doesn't always get hung on a wall.

As someone who works for HP helping to design and manufacture printheads and supplies, I REALLY appreciate the sentiment expressed here. I only wish more people felt as you did. Then my profit share check would be bigger. :)


Canon 60D, Canon18-135 USM IS, Canon 75-300 IS, Sigma 105 f2.8 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Art ­ Vandelay
Senior Member
329 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Australia
     
Feb 23, 2012 01:50 |  #5

I'm a bit old school, a photo isnt finished until it's printed.


7D & 5DmkIII, 10-17 Tokina, 17-40 f/4, 17-55 f/2.8, 24-105 f/4, 70-200 f/2.8, 300 f/2.8, EX1.4 II, EX 2.0 II
Aquatech CO-7 housing.
Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Feb 23, 2012 02:31 |  #6

Art Vandelay wrote in post #13949030 (external link)
I'm a bit old school, a photo isnt finished until it's printed.

Same here.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Feb 23, 2012 02:33 |  #7

Art Vandelay wrote in post #13949030 (external link)
I'm a bit old school, a photo isnt finished until it's printed.

Ditto...


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gregg.Siam
Goldmember
Avatar
2,383 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Bangkok
     
Feb 23, 2012 04:25 |  #8

Art Vandelay wrote in post #13949030 (external link)
I'm a bit old school, a photo isnt finished until it's printed.

By definition, the photo is done before printing or you would never send it to the printer. :p

I'm old school too, but I just don't care about printing anymore than I care about using whale oil for my lamp or getting ice blocks for my fridge. (ok, a bit of an exaggeration) Printing served its purpose, but the entire world communicates digitally now for the most part, and the decline in printing is obviously a reflection of that.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying printing is dead; only that the industry is changing. I'm sure wedding photographers aren't just going to stop printing as people want to hang pictures on their walls regardless of the digital age. Airplanes photographers, artists, and other specialty groups will also need to print to sell images.


5D MKIII | 24-105mm f/4 L| 50mm f/1.8 | 600EX-RT [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=bl​ue][FONT="]|
∞ 500px (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tessa
Playing with fire
Avatar
1,806 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 114
Joined Sep 2008
     
Feb 23, 2012 04:59 as a reply to  @ Gregg.Siam's post |  #9

I rarely print these days but a lot of my stuff gets published in magazines, so that kind of counts... right?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,479 posts
Likes: 198
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Feb 23, 2012 05:01 |  #10

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #13949151 (external link)
Ditto...

Double ditto.

I admit that digital frames are attractive, but I never print small stuff unless somebody, children or grandchildren, needs one, and a frame the size of a 13x19 print would need to have a 23 or 24 inch screen. Biggest I've seen is 15 inch. I suppose I could set up a 24 inch monitor and a cheap notebook to run a slide show, but that would be pricey and wouldn't have the same return in terms of satisfaction.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Logicus
Senior Member
Avatar
787 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Independence, KY
     
Feb 23, 2012 05:13 |  #11

I LOVE prints.... I'm part of a club here in Cincinnati that gathers and shows prints once a month at a place called Arnold's - it's a bar that is the oldest bar in Cincinnati. The owner has actually given us the upstairs (about three rooms) and has installed molding that thin chains hang from that everyone hangs their prints on. They go through and take down all of their artwork for us to show... third Saturday every month. It's an opportunity to sell prints, framed or not, and for everyone to gather and "talk shop". We wouldn't have it if it weren't for prints. Might as well do a conference call and sit, staring at eachother's flickr accounts on screen.

Some shots from one of the first shows... they've grown a bit since then, and it seems the smallest prints you see on the walls now are maybe 11"X17"'s.... lots of fun!

IMAGE: http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4047/4313092344_f27f45feee_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/4​313092344/  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4046/4312351809_c9d46feb4f_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/4​312351809/  (external link)

IMAGE: http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4059/4313089566_49d09dc4bf_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …gicusaeturnus/4​313089566/  (external link)

My Gear List
My flickr (external link)
My flickr photos organized by Lens Used (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mattia
Senior Member
528 posts
Joined Feb 2009
     
Feb 23, 2012 08:02 |  #12

Like Mafoo says, for the vast majority of the pictures I take, no, it doesn't matter. But it matters hugely for the ones I really like, the real 'keepers', because I print those big. 30x40 (cm) or even 40x60 (cm) is pretty 'normal' for me, and I'm increasingly printing even larger. Currently fiddling with a couple of panos that will likely get printed up 50 to 60" wide


5DII | 300D | 30D IR | 17-40L | 24-105L IS | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 15 FE | 35L | 50/1.8 mk I | 135L | Sigmalux 50/1.4 | Sigma 105/F2.8 Macro | C/Y Planar 50/1.4 | C/Y Distagon 35/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
altitude604
Goldmember
Avatar
1,665 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
     
Feb 23, 2012 08:20 |  #13

Been doing more prints lately.

Just ordered up another three 16x24s for a client the other day. :)


Erik - Three Miles Final (external link)
- Gear List -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sjones
Goldmember
Avatar
2,226 posts
Likes: 189
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
     
Feb 23, 2012 08:39 as a reply to  @ altitude604's post |  #14

A photographic print, like a painting, is a medium. As with a painting or a sculpture, its value is not determined by technological advances. A digital image is another medium, a convenient one, and one that it certainly more easy to disseminate. One does not render the other obsolete in terms of aesthetic value, lest one think that viewing a painting or listening to a piano is somehow anachronistic.

People are taking hundreds of photos within a week, maybe a day; it is largely impossible to print them all. However, I would encourage folks to print at least their favorites.


July 2018-July 2019 (external link)
It's the Photographer (external link) | God Loves Photoshop (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
goldboughtrue
Goldmember
1,857 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Colorado
     
Feb 23, 2012 08:49 |  #15
bannedPermanent ban

A photo shared by computer, tablet, etc. depends on the resolution and color of the monitor. So the same image may look slightly different on various screens. However, a physical print will look the same no matter what. Plus, if you have no power to your device you can still see the print!


http://www.pbase.com/g​oldbough (external link)

5D II, Canon 100 macro, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 24-105 L, Canon TS-E 45, Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,166 views & 0 likes for this thread
It won't be noticeable on the print
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is proxyrdp
1041 guests, 283 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.