Shadowing an experienced printer

[Calzone]

I spent a substantial part of my photography career in the darkroom printing other peoples' work. This idea here that a great printer is one who makes great negatives that need only be printed on one grade of paper----that sounds as bad to me as the idea that a great driver is one who can drive perfectly on a straight, well-paved road with no ice and no other traffic.

Your point is well taken, but John is correct that I was refering to what I can control which is my own work.

For sure printing other people's work is another path and an other challenge that requires a flexible approach.

My approach certainly is narrow, and that is the point.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

As a follow up to my original post, I would liken photo printing to playing a musical instrument. The basics are pretty easy to learn. Then you practice for consistency of tone and technique. That practice takes a long time for most folks... and a LOT of practice. Once you've achieved consistency of tone and technique, then you can begin to develop nuance and subsequently, style.

Plus one.

One summer I shot on average 150 rolls of film per month (120 and 135) and somehow was able to process all that film monthly in weekend long marathon developing sessions. This concentration was not sustainable, but each tank of either four 120 rolls or eight 35mm rolls allowed me to critically evaluate my entire development process.

In a way it was like the "woodshedding" that musicians do. I also loaded up the truck when close dated Acros was only $1.89 a roll in 135, and at Adorama for $3.69 a roll in 120. I bought 700 rolls of Arista Premium when it was $2.89 a roll.

John mentioned to me that one of the best tools is a critical eye, and I would say that ones own prints and negatives can teach oneself a lot. The quote from that Magnum photographer is very valid. The key here is to develop a critical eye. I find that keeping a logbook helps with the forensics when I evaluate my negatives and prints. It is a journal that gathers information, much useless, but sometimes very valuable to connect the dots.

Cal

 

[jsrockit]

If you use a master printer who makes good records, you can achieve the same consistency. I depended on color printers knowing me.

Well right, but Master Printers work with great artists I would imagine and most likely have the resources to make the job as easy as possible. I worked for a crap studio that gave me negatives that ran the spectrum from way too thin to dense as f. I thought I knew how to print well...I quickly figured out that I only knew how to print my work well.

On a side note, C-41 / E-6 is a bit more consistent in how negatives / positives are developed vs. the range of options for B&W development. While the color development process for film was more consistent, the thing with color printing that was different was that a certain color balance could be consistent through a box of paper if you used the same film. If you used various films, you'd have different color balances to deal with which was, for me, a pain.

 

[Calzone]

Well right, but Master Printers work with great artists I would imagine and most likely have the resources to make the job as easy as possible. I worked for a crap studio that gave me negatives that ran the spectrum from way too thin to dense as f. I thought I knew how to print well...I quickly figured out that I only knew how to print my work well.

On a side note, C-41 / E-6 is a bit more consistent in how negatives / positives are developed vs. the range of options for B&W development. While the color development process for film was more consistent, the thing with color printing that was different was that a certain color balance could be consistent through a box of paper if you used the same film. If you used various films, you'd have different color balances to deal with which was, for me, a pain.

John and others make the point that I would likely suck printing other people's work, I don't denigh that.

My hat is off to those that are forced to rescue images.

Cal

 

[calebarchie]

Well right, but Master Printers work with great artists I would imagine and most likely have the resources to make the job as easy as possible.

Well I have 'shadowed' a master printer here for a short time and lets just say that usually isn't the case - it really is all over the place with some renown artists having some pretty shonky looking negs and poor communication. Luckily he does have a developing service which makes his life a lot easier when he needs to print.

 

[jsrockit]

Well I have 'shadowed' a master printer here for a short time and lets just say that usually isn't the case - it really is all over the place with some renown artists having some pretty shonky looking negs and poor communication. Luckily he does have a developing service which makes his life a lot easier when he needs to print.

Thanks for the info. I should've have known better.

 

[Calzone]

Yeah I already told you one had to print my stuff. 🙂

Fred,

Really funny.

Cal

 

[Hsg]

No one can teach you how to take a good photo (I don't completely believe that but it sounds official).

I am certainly glad that I didn't follow that advice as a youngster. I'd have missed out on SO much. One of the things I've been able to learn over the years about photography is that there are two areas of knowledge: those things I know, and that it's important to know about those things I don't know. The few things I know, I know well. There are, however, lots of those things I know that I don't know... and that's where the instruction of others is invaluable.

Knowledge is passed down from one person to another, sometimes consciously other times unconsciously. Some people, like the OP, seek a teacher, other times someone else might seek a pupil. There is a pleasure in teaching as well as being taught new skills. I don't deny at all the value of teaching and learning in photography or any other field.

The reason I value the saying, "your photos are your only teacher [in photography, or maybe even life], is for a very specific phenomenon.

We're all very quick to judge the photos of others, but when it comes to our own photos, we're indecisive. We like or dislike the images of major photographers, and yet for some reason we find all our own images to be 'good' or even 'great', we don't dislike any of our own photos...

If you look at online photo hosting sites, people have thousands of photos uploaded while if you visit the site of a major photographer, they show 20 plus or even less photos. The magnum photo member's portfolio is around 50 photos plus if they have their books posted online, while an average flickr user has more than 500 images uploaded.

And when it comes to printing, once again the answer to how should I print is very much in the pictures that one wants to print. If you have a well-exposed negative of strong content and form, a straight print is good enough like all of HCB's photos. On other side if you have a well-exposed negative of a strong content but a straight print will not be good enough, like Ansel Adam's Moonrise Hernandez, then once again its the photographer who was there in the moment of capture who can replicate the same condition on the print, not the oblivious master printer who was not there when the image was captured.

The OP should seek a teacher and good luck to him finding one for free, but before that he should contemplate by looking at his photos and prints carefully and finding out where his lacking, and from personal experience I can say that 99.99% of the time, the problem is with the photos not the prints.

 

[Oscuro]

Make a list of the printers whose work you like. DONT BE SHY! Put down the names even if you think they wouldn't "deign to speak to mere mortals." Track them down (the ones that are still alive) and then contact them to see if they teach or allow job shadowing. You might be surprised.

 

[calebarchie]

Knowledge is passed down from one person to another...bla bla bla..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoAiBNSpg6Y

 

[Trius]

The technically "perfect" negative is a tool. Anyone who discounts or disdains the goal and effort doesn't really understand what the ultimate goal is.