New Info: Archival Prints, plus Defining Fine Art Photography

Tom Hubbard, editor of the Portland Metro Photographic News, author of numerous articles, and photographer, has recently published two articles that are worth a careful read. 

What “Archival Photographic Print” Really Means, offers a fresh look at this subject:

From the first part of the article (quoted from an interview with Harald Johnson): “”Archival photographic print” is hard to pin down. Why? Because there’s no uniformly accepted definition of what is “archival” and what is not. In fact, the word “archival” just means something that is in an archive, being stored, not necessarily monitored or preserved.”  Tom goes on the provide one of the best reviews, and suggestions, I’ve seen in quite a while.

The other, part of an ongoing series, When Is A Photograph Fine Art?, begins:  “Although nearly every… respondent agreed that art (let alone fine art photography) is subjective, nearly every professional forged on to provide insights that can contribute guidance and some direction when photographers evaluate their own bodies of photographic work.  After reading scores of replies, there are commonly-held views on what determines when a photograph reaches the level of fine art.”

While you are on his site, I strongly suggest that you take a look at his other articles. Tom is an experienced, thoughtful commentator and author.

2 thoughts on “New Info: Archival Prints, plus Defining Fine Art Photography

  1. Pingback: New Info: Archival Prints, plus Defining Fine Art Photography

  2. Pingback: Twitted by in_photography

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s