It is not that long since the view of the majority of the RPS heirachs appeared to be that the collection was a millstone around their necks, expensive to maintain (even poorly) and of no value (as they could not sell it) and no interest. At the time I suggested to some of them that it might form the basis of a National Museum of Photography (on long-term loan from the Society), but no interest was shown in this. Various other collections could have contributed to this (for example the Hulton collection - I was almost thrown off the Hulton-Deustch stand at a Creative Show a couple of years ago for suggesting that this might be exploited more as a cultural resource than a money-making exercise) and the seriously underfunded and resourced photography section of the V&A. Personally I regard the lack of a National Museum of Photography as a national scandal and would hope that Chris Smith might be persuaded to find some money towards such a project. Of course I do know about Bradford and that museum there - least said the better. Photography, Film and Television really have very little of consequence in common.
It does
seem a great missed opportunity that this has not been organised as a national event. There are a few crumbs outside of Bradford, Barnsley, Halifax, Hull, Leeds, Sheffield and York, but that's it. Or is this the first real success for the Yorkshire Nationalists - including as it does all three ridings?
It is already clear that large-format is fast on the way out so far as film is concerned, being replaced by digital backs for studio work and increasingly by medium format for those aspects of photography where the simpler movements provided by some medium format cameras/lenses suffice. Recent improvements in colour film technology make it possible to get results from even 645 that would have previously needed 4x5. However for portraiture and non-static subjects digital still has some way to go in this area before - may be as long as 5 or 10 years - before it can compare with the quality on film.
With 35mm, things are different. Digital cameras are rapidly replacing film for both rapid news-gathering and through the tills of Dixons for the amateur snap. Current momentum suggests it may well be dead before the Millennium.
One acknowledge expert on such things is Henry Wilhelm, and in October he presented some of his results to the International Association of Fine Art Digital Printmakers meeting in San Francisco. These make interesting reading. If you want your colour prints to last you should be printing on Fuji Super FA Type 5, with an estimated life of 71 years compared to Ilfochrome (long considered the most stable of colour materials) at 29 years. Apart from one system using special pigment based inks and some special archival inks from Ilford, ink jets get a poorer rating, particularly those available at reasonable price. The Epson Stylus range (currently winning all the computer magazine printer comparative print quality tests), one of which is used to print the master copy of this publication gives estimates from 6 months to 5 years dependent on paper type, figures which if anything seem high compared to my own experience. There is no doubt that the photo paper manufacturers now see ink jet papers as their future market. I spent some time at Silverprint looking through a number of test prints, including those of a couple of Kentmere papers, one with an interesting textured finish. Elsewhere I was told that Kentmere are no longer carrying out any research into silver papers, only developing their ink jet range. There seems to be very little advice on the current papers available; and I suspect it will not be long before Martin Reed - a welcome visitor to the print show following the AGM - will have some sample prints and comments in a new catalogue. Anyone without a copy of their current catalogue I'd suggest visits 12 Valentine Place SE1 8QH (5 minutes walk from Waterloo) and collects one. They do have more or less everything you could ever need in terms of photographic materials, certainly for archival processing.
The editor certainly does not agree with everything that is written in the magazine (not always even with everything that he himself contributes -I've always thought consistency a sign of lack of imagination.) As always I welcome contributions on any subject of likely interest to readers related to photography, including the activities (past and future) of LIP. Feel free to call and discuss any ideas you have, though you can just send the articles and pictures. Of course occasionally as I can make suggestions for improvements as well as putting some things into our normal formats.
At our recent AGM (an interesting event for those who missed it - unfortunately the minutes have yet to be circulated) there were a few signs of future change as well as a few changes in personalities. Our new Chair is Peter Jennings, Roger having decided not to continue. Several of us were elected for a further term, including those we would be lost without - Janet and Ginny. There are a number of new members of the committee; one post, that of Exhibitions Organiser remains unfilled, and I'm sure that volunteers are still welcome.
© Peter Marshall 1997