To print or not print

Discussion in 'Printing' started by peterpix, Oct 22, 2013.

  1. peterpix

    peterpix Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 8, 2010
    So. Maine
    Peter Randal
  2. Replytoken

    Replytoken Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 7, 2012
    Puget Sound
    Why does it need to be an either/or choice? I love my images when they are printed, especially when they are printed large, but that does not preclude me from sharing them with a larger audience via the internet. No, it is not the same experience, but communication takes place in a variety of ways, and each method has its purpose. I remember reading someone once saying that if Robert Capa had lived, he would probably have taken up shooting video as he was taken by it as a medium. Different horses for different courses.

  3. alex66

    alex66 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 23, 2010
    To me the print in either the book or on the wall is the end of the process, I hardly put anything up on the internet. The print has a wonderfull physicality that the screen just does not give, although I can look up the work from almost any great photographer I preffer to see on the wall or in a book too. It is highly personal though and I have heard of those that love using wall mounted screens to show their work in some kind of loop so it justdepends on what you like.
  4. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Ho Hum. Another "I like to look at my photos this way so this is the best way" article.

    Yes, there is a difference between looking at an image on screen and looking at a print. There are advantages and disadvantages to both, and some people prefer one way to the other. Sometimes that preference is based on image quality, sometimes on convenience, sometimes on something else. Personal preferences always represent a valid choice, no matter what the preference.

    Choose how you want to view and present your images and then do the best you can to present your images that way.
  5. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    For me, prints are for exceptional photographs - whether from a technical, artistic or emotional perspective (i.e. special picture of a special someone or somewhere or something). I take far more photographs than I'll ever print and put up on a wall, but I feel ever euro I've spent on large prints has been a euro well spent. Looking at it on screen or in a nice print is different. Both good, but folks who never print are missing out.

    Have to say that it's got to be bigger than an 8x10 to get really fun for me.
  6. darosk

    darosk Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Apr 17, 2013
    Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
    ^ Yeah, Seeing a well-executed Large format print really brings across visual poetry in a way computer monitors cannot. I remember my first time seeing an 8x10 landscape shooter's exhibition. I can't for the life of me remember his name, but the smallest print was about 7 feet across, and the larger ones were twice that, at least. The detail was ridiculous, the exposures impeccable. You really felt enveloped by the sprawling landscapes - it was difficult to put into words.

    Not all photos are worth printing, but I do believe you've got to make at least some prints in your life. Even if it's just some 4x6's. It's a great feeling, holding some nice, physical prints in your hands.
  7. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 20, 2011
    Having seen Caponigro's (both father and son) prints in person, magazine and on monitors. There is a difference in the quality and vision of presentation of his style of printing, and his pictures, that can not be represented at all by a monitor. Probably has something to do with his father, who was also a master printer. I don't really think "ho hum" is a correct response when you can't get the whole experience.

    imo, his fathers prints were better, but technology that makes things easier isn't always better. Then again Paul Caponigro shots will cost you thousands to own. Although I do kind of like John P Caponigro's images better.

    If you see the depth that they get, the overall presentation, everything. You can spend so much time just looking. On a monitor done in a second, and on to the next.
  8. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    I'm not arguing absolute quality. I haven't seen any of either Caponigro's prints but I have seen good prints and yes, I think they do look better than images do on a screen.

    My point is different. We choose how to present our images based on a number of considerations and ultimate image quality isn't necessarily the deciding factor, or even a major factor, in some cases. I think what's important is that you try to do the best with the presentation method you choose.

    And the "whole experience" doesn't demand that you make prints in my view, just as it doesn't demand that you shoot film, or do wet processing, or shoot black and white, or use full frame or larger, or any one or more of the whole range of other decisions people make about how they pursue their photography. Viewing images on a screen is a "whole experience", just a different experience to viewing prints. My "Ho hum" was a comment on the attitude that if you're not doing things in one particular way then you're not really doing things properly or fully or whatever. There's a value judgement in that kind of attitude which I totally reject.

    There are those who think that only live music is "real music" but Glen Gould, a more than competent and experienced live concert performer, made a conscious and deliberate choice to give up live performance and only work in a recording studio. I don't think his music making suffered. He didn't offer his audience the same experience they were used to but he did offer them the experience he chose to present. Someone who decides not to print and to present their images in some other way is making a similar choice, and how an artist presents their work is an artistic choice that only the artist can make. They have options and they can choose. They aren't "wrong" or lesser artists because they choose an option others prefer to avoid.
  9. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Print and be damned!
  10. finerflower

    finerflower Amin Fangrrl

    Dec 11, 2013
    New Jersey (South)
    Remember the days when we went to the Fotomat in the KMart parking lot to pick up prints made from that ole roll of film rolling around the kitchen drawer. The prints were all grainy because we forgot about taking those pictures. However, what a treat it was to see that time in life that we recorded and momentarily forgot.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Chrisnmn

    Chrisnmn Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 26, 2012
    Auckland, New Zealand
    I personally run by "its not a picture until is printed".

    but this is like "film or digital" type of thread...
  12. ApGfoo

    ApGfoo Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 10, 2012
    Bay Area
    I used to just print a **** ton of 4 by 6s but then it isn't the best way for others to view those photos unless they are in book form. The past couple years I've been making end of the year photo books with this year being the third time.

    Adoramapix photo books are pretty good and there is always a discount. 20% off 8x10 Photo Books: PX81020
    Ends December 31 for this year. Plus they are pretty fun to make.

    I'm not done with mine yet but it's close. here's a link:

    Eventually I'll put something up on a wall if the picture is worth it.
  13. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    I print a TON of my images - albeit most are either 4x6 or 5x7 but I do print a slew of images. :smile:
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.