On 2013-02-03 14:28, Ken Sinclair wrote:
In the past few years I have 'enjoyed' making prints in the archaic non- silver processes from 4x5 and 8x10 inch negatives that seem to have been well accepted by viewers. I would thus be tempted to suggest that there be a print size maximum that might be acceptable for presenting to an general audience. After some 60 years under the dark-cloth, I strongly maintain that bigger prints are not necessary 'better' prints….
In terms of shipping, workable exhibition venues, and the work of receiving, assembling, and actually hanging the exhibition in each place it visits, it seems to me that a max size is probably a good practical idea.
(I agree on the artistic point that bigger prints are not necessarily better; I also hold that in some cases a picture really demands printing very big.)
-- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
