• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Exhibition planning

Exhibition planning

July 4, 2010 JimK Leave a Comment

Before Eric picked out the work for the Hartnell exhibition, he had to know about how many prints he could get on the wall. To figure that out, he asked me how big the matted prints would be. I told him that I usually print these images on 17×22 paper with 1 inch margins. With 1/2 inch relief all around, 3 inches of mat on the top and sides, and 3 1/2 inches on the bottom, the matted work would be 24 1/2 by 29. Using those dimensions, Eric figured that 34 prints would be about right.

After Eric picked the prints from the show, I read a column by David Vestal in Photo Techniques in which David talked about a show that he was preparing. He had decided to present the work unmatted under glass. I was intrigued. I had always matted exhibition work before, and had some misgivings about the cost, and didn’t like getting the work back and having to find some place to store it — it takes up six or seven times as much space matted as it does loose. I asked Eric if it would be all right to present the work unmatted if I printed the images on Arches Infinity 22×30 paper, with an image size similar to what I originally proposed. He thought that was fine, and said that he had enough 22×30 glass already in stock.

Some say that in war no plan survives contact with the enemy. My printing plan began to unravel almost immediately. In between flipping levers while I was converting the 9800 from Photo Black to Matte Black, I checked out my paper supply. I found one 25-sheet box of Infinity. “Oh well,” I thought, “I’ll just order some more and get started with what I have in the meantime.” I poked around on the web for 15 minutes and couldn’t find Arches Infinity in that size.

A little history. In the late nineties, when I started using 22×30 paper, it was a standard watercolor size. It probably still is. I first started out printing on regular watercolor paper. Later, when paper with coatings optimized for inkjet printing became available, 22×30 seem to be “grandfathered in”, at least by the paper companies that already had a watercolor paper business. Over time, the photographic inkjet market grew and, I imagine, the watercolor market remained relatively static, until we reached the point where the photography market was much larger than the watercolor market. At first, in the US inkjet sheet paper was mostly available in the standard graphic arts sizes of 8.5×11 (A size), 11×17 (B size), 17×22 (C size), 22×34 (D size), with 13×19 added. Then came the photographic sizes: 8×10, 11×14, 16×20, 20×24, and so on. Now, at least in the case of 22×30, we’re seeing the inkjet paper suppliers winnow out some of their watercolor sizes.

I needed a plan B. I scrounged around and found 50 sheets of 24×36 Hahnemuele Photo Rag that I’d bought for a project that never happened. I called up Eric and asked if I could print the show on that. He said that he thought it would fit (we might have to leave one or two images out), and that he thought he could get the glass we’d need. I breathed a sigh of relief, and started printing, leaving a 4 inch margin on the top and sides, and 4 1/2 on the bottom of the wide images. I tried printing the squarish pictures with four inch side margins, but the image looked to small, so I went with three inch side margins. I set the top margin to three inches less than the bottom margin to lift the squarish images by that much on the portrait-mode background.

The Last Word

← Getting ready for an exhibition QWERTY and cameras →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.