Also, I figured something out with the evacuation procedures that might help you in the future...
Well, I'm an Orthodox APUGer who does believe that everything digital should be kept at arm's length here.* Yet in this case scanning the original negative and manipulating that scan using the contrast, brightness, sharpening, and burning-in digital equivalents was the best way to comply with the upload rule "The uploaded image should be the best representation of the actual final print and nothing more." The reason being that the scan step came after the actual final printing step. I just didn't have that original print in front of me at that moment. And I've never scanned and posted from a negative where I have not first made an original real print to guide me.**
Ahh, but you say only an actual scan of an actual print counts. Well, before I found my current cheap less-crappy scanner I had a different cheaper more-crappy scanner. And the CCD elements on the more-crappy scanner appeared to be arranged on the scan bar at just the right angle to consistently pick up the tooth of the paper surface. The end result was always a scan that looked like golf ball sized grain. So I was forced to scan the original negatives, then alter those scans to match the real prints in order to meet both the letter and the intent of the upload rule.
Was I in violation?
Ken
* If one were to begin today to look at a different digital/hybrid photography website every day for the rest of one's life, that individual could do so until they died of old age and STILL miss seeing all of them by three orders of magnitude. All I'm asking for is just this one analog site. Only one. No more. And I promise I'll never go visit a single digital/hybrid website and tell them they're all stupid for not changing their focus to film because that happens to be what I like. I don't think that's an unreasonable request...
** But I have posted direct scans from color transparencies, as the transparencies are themselves the final analog image output medium.
Additional thought, this is an ALL ANALOG right? So all of you using electronic processors like JOBO systems and rotating drums etc, none of those images are allowed here, you can only post hand processed imagery :munch:
~Stone
Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
My enlarger timer is a digital one. Though it has dials. :confused:
I'm not going to read the entire thread because i don't have time and you don't read/like the rules. Maybe someone mentioned this or maybe they didn't: slides can be printed optically without internegs or special equipment by using Ilford's direct positive paper. I'm not sure why this is always overlooked.
And there are plenty of labs which print traditionally, even in nyc.
I'm not going to read the entire thread because i don't have time and you don't read/like the rules. Maybe someone mentioned this or maybe they didn't: slides can be printed optically without internegs or special equipment by using Ilford's direct positive paper. I'm not sure why this is always overlooked.
And there are plenty of labs which print traditionally, even in nyc.
My enlarger timer is a digital one. Though it has dials. :confused:
I think all that stuff is discontinued ...
~Stone
Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry Stone - that is one of their recent additions to the Harmann Ilford line.
It is black and white of course.
So I could actually really print optically a B&W image from my chrome cave image? Hmmm...
Haha
~Stone
Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
I think all that stuff is discontinued ...
~Stone
Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
What percentage of what you say is based on facts?
I'm not going to read the entire thread because i don't have time and you don't read/like the rules. Maybe someone mentioned this or maybe they didn't: slides can be printed optically without internegs or special equipment by using Ilford's direct positive paper. I'm not sure why this is always overlooked.
And there are plenty of labs which print traditionally, even in nyc.
hi wildbill,
great minds think alike !
i suggest stone make a print of his chrome, right onto ilford direct positive paper back on page 3
i also suggested he make a paper transparency and a contact print using the sun cyanotype ( sun print paper from the hobby shop )
which will retain its BLUE tone
a paper transparency can be made the old fashioned way with photo paper,
or a new fangled way using one of those weird machines that makes xeroxigraphical images
either way the paper is WAXED ... if stone is lucky he may find a run down copy shop that has
an old fashioned analog slide projector for the copy machine, one that projects the image onto
a reflector and down onto the glass, so much more fun than a jpg or pdf file yuck !
My enlarger timer is a digital one. Though it has dials. :confused:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?