Film to monitor.

Grandpa Ron · May 7, 2021

Jeff you are correct.4x5 or bigger is a lot of surface area. I have absolutely no issue with the results since I went to f360. They look good, whether contact printed or enlarged to 5x7.

However, up loading to the laptop was the issue that resulted in three pages of comments . Not the fact that that I found a better way of uploading than my cheap-o multipurpose scanner but the fact that the upload method digitized the photos. Some people took offence at mentioning digital on a 100% analog site. They certainly have the right to that opinion.

In spite of all the rhetoric, I doubt if there will be any changes to the way folks upload their photos.

MattKing · May 8, 2021

Grandpa Ron said:
Some people took offence at mentioning digital on a 100% analog site. They certainly have the right to that opinion.

No offence - it is just that this thread isn't in the right place on the site.
Photrio hasn't ever been all analog.
Its predecessor (APUG) was.

Craig75 · May 8, 2021

AgX said:
-) I do not see my comment more hash than that of the OP, concerning "tribal knowledge", on which I replied..
.

Tribal knowledge is just a fun friendly way of describing the collective information of the board. Photographers are the tribe - here's some info for the tribe.

AgX · May 8, 2021

He intended to spread that knowledge of his to a group intentionally not belonging to the tribe, what he explicetely negated.
Strange that after more than 50 posts this still is not realized.

Craig75 · May 8, 2021

AgX said:
He intended to spread that knowledge of his to a group intentionally not belonging to the tribe.
Strange that after more than 50 posts this still is not realized.

if Ron's a photographer and a member of the baord he's part of the same tribe we all belong too.

Honestly you're desparately looking to be offended over nothing.

AgX · May 8, 2021

I joined an analog-only group. And did so for a reason. And after erecting Photrio Sean decided to keep that group alive by installing that segregation, he even installed kind of firewalls by means of explicit warnings what to post and what not.

If someone not by mistake but by intent neglect these rules, even telling what to do, this is offensive, to stay with your wording.

removed account4 · May 8, 2021

jnantz said:
recently ( or maybe it was an ad I saw I can hardly tell anymore )

Hey I found it…
https://instagram.com/filmboxbyphotomyne?igshid=creiqeoybhie
lots the app I mentioned.
Good luck !
J

Alan Edward Klein · May 8, 2021

ChristopherCoy said:
Let me pose a question. So what?

What or who would truly be harmed if no one reacts to one thread being in the wrong place of the forum?

I rarely notice which section a thread is in. I just look at the threads that have a new post and open the ones I'm interested in from the list. I never go to any particular section.

Alan Edward Klein · May 8, 2021

Identity politics anyone?

AgX · May 8, 2021

Fellows, then question the rules, but not the guy who hints at those rules.

Maybe the analog section will be cancelled. Then some members would leave, me included. But life will be going on.

grat · May 8, 2021

AgX said:
Fellows, then question the rules, but not the guy who hints at those rules.

Maybe the analog section will be cancelled. Then some members would leave, me included. But life will be going on.

"hint" usually implies a mild, subtle indication that you would like the rules followed.

Telling someone their post isn't welcome here is not a "hint". It is an ultimatum.

I don't know how others felt, but I felt your post had an unwarranted level of aggression, given the relatively mild level of the infraction. In addition, I have questioned whether the rules are overly strict-- by a literal interpretation, any photo posted in the "analog only" section should be moved, or simply deleted.

BrianShaw · May 8, 2021

The “trio” part of Photrio had noble intent. Interestingly, the owner and mods don’t seem to be as zealous about “the rules” than some of the self-appointed analogue-only zealots. I’d hate to see them go but once a threat is proffered I’m the first to suggest that they might want to start their own site that is more to their liking.

Don_ih · May 8, 2021

So, in this part of the forum, one should not mention, however so briefly, a digital method of scanning.
But in this part of the forum, a thread can be pounded by an endless nattering about what can and can't be posted here?
In the first instance, you have one post.
In the second instance, you have about 50.
And no one ever said a word about the pinhole image Grandpa Ron originally posted. What was the point, then?

BrianShaw · May 8, 2021

Grandpa Ron said:
Once I got reasonably happy with my PH techniques I wanted to share them. That meant they had to be digitized.

Putting a negative on a home scanner with an external light source shining down on it. This is a rather common technique. Unfortunately with 35 mm even the finest scan resolution available to me (2400 dpi), would show scan lines when enlarged to view on the monitor. I switched from 35 mm to 4x5 film which help considerably. Still, occasionally I still could detect some scan lines.

I watch a video on converting 35mm slides to digital with a light board and a digital camera with a close up lens. After making a light board I found I could buy and 9"x12" board used for artist tracing for $13.00, all I needed was a white sheet of plastic to defuse all the tiny little led lights. It is more uniform and brighter than my home made board.

This image is from the scanner.

View attachment 273680

This image is with the Light board. Using the digital camera has far better resolution and contrast.
View attachment 273681
This photo was taken in the woods on a sunny day, at with 200 ISO film and f360 for 60 sec.

I just thought I would add to the tribal knowledge of the board.

Have fun

I sincerely appreciate the wisdom on two potential methods for showing the results of analog photography, specifically pinhole, on an Internet forum such as this. Interesting options that a purely analog photographer who wishes to post examples might consider. I also appreciate the additional discussion being held in the digital arena.

BrianShaw · May 8, 2021

Don Heisz said:
And no one ever said a word about the pinhole image Grandpa Ron originally posted.

Keen observation. Corrected.

MattKing · May 8, 2021

Don Heisz said:
So, in this part of the forum, one should not mention, however so briefly, a digital method of scanning.

Not the issue at all.
This thread is about how to digitize a pinhole negative. It is intended to encourage discussion about that - not the pinhole negative itself.
It isn't about how to make a pinhole negative, or the advantages of pinhole negatives, or what films are suitable for pinhole, or what developers work great for that purpose, or how much fun Grandpa Ron had making his pinhole negative.
There are sections of this site that are specifically designed to encourage discussion about techniques and equipment and software used in the process of digitization.
So why is it a mistake to say it should be moved to the section of the site that welcomes discussion about digitization?
If Grandpa Ron had mistakenly started this thread in the Photrio Partner Forum for Ilford Photo because he was using Ilford film (I don't know if he did use Ilford film) would anyone be complaining about a request to move the thread?
If you read a lot of my posts, you will find a fair number of suggestions that a thread should be moved. And I make a lot of requests about that to the moderators. And a lot of threads do get moved.
My requests tend to be more diplomatic than the one from AgX in this thread - something like "I think this thread should be moved to the "Misc. Hybrid Discussions" sub-forum". - but surely that issue of diplomacy is an issue on its own.

MattKing · May 8, 2021

Don Heisz said:
And no one ever said a word about the pinhole image Grandpa Ron originally posted. What was the point, then?

It is a fun image and I'm glad he posted it. As many can tell from my uploads over the years, I have a liking for photos in the woods.
Interestingly enough, Grandpa Ron himself posted almost nothing about the image itself. He posted about how he digitized it - I'd suggest that that was the point. So the discussions went from there.

Don_ih · May 8, 2021

MattKing said:
This thread is about how to digitize a pinhole negative. It is intended to encourage discussion about that - not the pinhole negative itself.

Nobody needed to talk about digitizing. It's possible to say "This is about digitizing but I'm not here to talk about that, so I won't" and move on to the next post.

MattKing said:
why is it a mistake to say it should be moved to the section of the site that welcomes discussion about digitization?

I didn't say it was. It just seems a little ironic that people are investing so many comments to say "You shouldn't say this here" and "You shouldn't be so nasty" and "He wasn't being nasty, he was just stating the rules," to the point where there are far more comments here about what should and should not be in this thread than comments that should rightfully be here.

Moving the thread would be sensible. Burying whatever the point of the thread is under 50 unrelated comments (now including two from me) seems to be worse than letting the thread stay where it is.

Don_ih · May 8, 2021

MattKing said:
Grandpa Ron himself posted almost nothing about the image itself. He posted about how he digitized it - I'd suggest that that was the point. So the discussions went from there.

That is true. But this is the analogue-only forum, so people should have talked about the image.

MattKing · May 8, 2021

Don Heisz said:
Moving the thread would be sensible. Burying whatever the point of the thread is under 50 unrelated comments (now including two from me) seems to be worse than letting the thread stay where it is.

I expect that this thread would have been moved right at the beginning if there had been any moderators on duty at the time - they certainly had at least one request to do so.
I'm assuming as well that when Grandpa Ron started the thread, he didn't see or appreciate the applicability of the big bright red box with white lettering that prominently states:
*NOTICE* THIS IS AN ANALOG WORKFLOW CONTENT AREA.
PLEASE ENSURE YOUR POST CONTAINS ZERO HYBRID OR DIGITAL CONTENT.

BrianShaw · May 8, 2021

Lawyers... many Photrions want to be one; some actually are. Photrions love to argue the details to the point of bickering.

AgX · May 8, 2021

grat said:
Telling someone their post isn't welcome here is not a "hint". It is an ultimatum.

Well, the rule even says that such posting is not allowed.
Me instead saying that such is not welcome is a polite hint at such rule. Calling such an ultimatum is absurd.

grat said:
I don't know how others felt, but I felt your post had an unwarranted level of aggression, given the relatively mild level of the infraction.

You may ask yourself again which side is to blame.
To me there is a strong difference in whether a analog-only thread over time gets shifted to a digital one by proposing "better" ways of doing by going digital or even expecting some films being used hybrid from the start, or starting a thread "I tell you now how to digitize your photographs" in a forum devoted to people intentionally only discussing their analog workflow.

AgX · May 8, 2021

MattKing said:
I expect that this thread would have been moved right at the beginning if there had been any moderators on duty at the time - they certainly had at least one request to do so.

I already stated right at the beginning of this thread that I expected moderators not to react and that such was my reason to comment.
I expected the OP to either ask himself to move the thread or to post another at right forum (with my comment being kind of closing post).

From his reply I deduce that he did not intend to do either, but felt right in his doing.

AgX · May 8, 2021

BrianShaw said:
The “trio” part of Photrio had noble intent. Interestingly, the owner and mods don’t seem to be as zealous about “the rules” than some of the self-appointed analogue-only zealots. I’d hate to see them go but once a threat is proffered I’m the first to suggest that they might want to start their own site that is more to their liking.

Good point.
But the same time one can argue that those who are bothered by arguments on this trias segregation are free to ask for the abolishments of this and turning Photrio officially into an all-allowed forum. (Maybe with a majority of analog-interested fellows due to its history.)
Seen this forum "once" was established just to retain an analog-only forum in a world turning digital, I though take the view that those above should take a step and not those "self-appointed analogue-only zealots" quietly leaving.
Thus it is a good, but tricky point.

MattKing · May 9, 2021

BrianShaw said:
Lawyers... many Photrions want to be one; some actually are. Photrions love to argue the details to the point of bickering.

Res Ipsa Loquitor

I have no problem if people want to argue for changing how the site is set up and what the rules require. My position on those arguments is that I prefer that the rules in place stay in place, and that threads be where they are designed to be.
I really don't want the site to have rules, and then have those rules ignored by some, while followed by others.

Film to monitor.

Grandpa Ron

MattKing

Moderator

Craig75

AgX

Craig75

AgX

removed account4

Alan Edward Klein

Alan Edward Klein

AgX

grat

BrianShaw

Don_ih

BrianShaw

BrianShaw

MattKing

Moderator

MattKing

Moderator

Don_ih

Don_ih

MattKing

Moderator

BrianShaw

AgX

AgX

AgX

MattKing

Moderator

Film to monitor.

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency