Reply inline below:
ws wrote:
> Not too late at all, jump right in. The water is nice.
> Sorry you had such a bad salesman experience. Did he happen
> to have an Oz accent?
LOL, no, typical big city American arrogance and impatience.
>
> They must have toned down their approach as the sales person
> in NY was very cordial and friendly, with no sales pitch. It is true
> that Peter Lik pioneered some of the early versions of the Fujifilm
> printing process, but I'm pretty sure it is the crystal archive pearl
> paper, and it does have silver halide crystals. And it is true that
> Fuji installed the system.
The sales pitch was insane. In the "viewing room" he turned out all the
lights, brought in rolled up canvases/prints, and would only display
them stretched out across the table directly under the two "spotlights"
or against the wall where the 3 or 6 spotlights were that illuminated
the framed panorama print already hanging there. I wondered about how
the image would appear in a sunlit room as opposed to the viewing room.
This is the point in which he went into great detail about the crystals
actually being in the ink, not the paper. He did talk about paper,
briefly, insomuch as it was also a Fuji product, but he focused very
strongly on the ink and the fact that absolutely no one else on planet
earth was using this process, that the process was not available to
anyone yet and was still in the trial phase. I did find some reference
to this upon returning home and trying to research Peter Lik a bit
online, but I can find no reference to those inks now.
>
> Personally, there are a lot folks on this list who could probably shoot
> just as good a shot if they had the money, equipment and time to
> pursue it.
I agree with that 100%.
I admire him for going out and doing it, but it is a business
> and depends on making sales. Now that he is established, the work
> is carrying it, but I personally would not pay $5-75K for some of his
> work.
The print in question that we were interested in was an image of Arches
National Park in Moab, Utah, just about an hour from where I live. Large
panorama, and the asking price was 1700.00 (USD) unframed. We had flown,
and so had no way to get it back home without it costing as much as
shipping a framed print. We do have family as well as business travel
that take us to the Vegas area at least a couple of times a year as well
as family that travels here, so we could have figured something out. We
were sorely tempted, and had the salesman's attitude been even close to
courteous, we would have bought.
>I'd rather go make my own shots and get them printed
> There must be some printer services that could do that?
>
> Peter's secret is simply being there with a good camera and film
> and knowing how to expose it well. I was actually surprised by
> one shot as I did not think it all that great, at least compared to
> some similar shots I have made. I just didn't us a 6x17 camera.
> And of course, having an obese camera and ego helps a lot.
I would imagine there is some truth to that last sentence.
Since the salesman took so long to explain to us that the secret to the
luminance was in the inks, and my husband and I marveled at that for the
rest of the day, I thought I would post what our experience was and what
we had been told...perhaps by someone who knew nothing or was just
trying to make a sale. I have no idea.
I know very well that you can't compare a print to an image of it
online, but it is amazing the difference in person. The images he has on
his website are many of the prints we saw in person in the viewing room,
and they were astounding to see in person. Not so much online.
Candace
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|