Is there reconciliation between digital and analog world in alternative processes

Let’s Ride!

A
Let’s Ride!

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Untitled

A
Untitled

  • 1
  • 2
  • 334
Blood Moon Zakynthos

H
Blood Moon Zakynthos

  • 0
  • 0
  • 600
Alexandra

H
Alexandra

  • 2
  • 0
  • 707

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,772
Messages
2,796,394
Members
100,033
Latest member
apoman
Recent bookmarks
0

Diapositivo

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
3,257
Location
Rome, Italy
Format
35mm
I'm sure Doug shoots from blinds sometimes (as have I) and has taken advantage of natural forms of concealment in the field, but he's written about his technique, and often it's just knowing how not to look like a predator. Art Morris, who is more well known and is always up to date with the latest technology uses many of the same techniques. Both of them are naturalists first, photographers second. This is more important than the gear. Sure there are some amazing things done with focus traps and such, but they are no substitute for basic knowledge of the subject. Bird photography is a very tough discipline, and any way you slice it, it's a lot of time in the field, a lot of missed shots.

Absolutely yes.
Even using a blind is not so easy. Birds are clever creatures. As an example, photographers have to enter in two persons and then after a while one leaves the hide so that the bird think the blind is empty, it seems!. The manoeuvre has to be repeated every day. The photographer often remains in the hide until night.

There are more favourable situations, though, where the birds are accustomed to human presence, such as on fixed hides in parks. I remember a birdwatcher hide in the Riserva Naturale di Macchiagrande, Rome, straight over a pond, where a Falco di Palude (Circus aeruginosus) was going around at comfortable shooting distance and many other birds were easily visible among which an Airone Rosso (Ardea purpurea), it goes without saying I was without a camera and it was backlit anyway). When I was younger I tried to do some of this kind of photography (my hide was my green car with the rear door opened) and I can attest it gives the "shiver" (just like birdwatching in general).

Another example is being lucky enough to have a garden in the countryside, set some natural perches and having a camera constantly aimed at the perch. Having the habit of sitting near the camera reading books helps.
 

macgabhan

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
16
Location
Brussels and
Format
8x10 Format
Hi All

I am new here, but this is exactly why I am here ... my current practice does this, I shoot digital and make the negs on an Epson 3800 using QTR (though I used to use PDN) then print in Palladium. I am intending to change this routine in the near future and use analogues capture on Fuji GX680 which I will digitise then proceed as I currently am. This change is waiting for a suitable scanner for the MF film (I am hoping that the Plustek is as good as the hype!). I am making this change because of the shortcomings in digital capture (I use a D2x and may buy the D800) in terms of enlargements ... images break down too soon for my plans, OK upto 16x20 but not really beyond that.

Anyway, for me no question, there is such a lot to be had from both avenues and I am sure that purists like Adams would have heartily embraced the technology in the same sort of way.

Dave
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
4,942
Location
Monroe, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
The unfortunate presumption here is that digital=easy.

Never presumed that. Sorry, but I've likely forgotten more about the difficulties of digitally abstracting reality than you ever knew in the first place.

Master digital retouchers aren't hacks. Digital processes don't axiomatically de-skill photographers and printers.

Never accused them of so being. And never said or implied that. How do you draw these conclusions? Did you not read the phrase "Not better. Not worse?"

Since I doubt you've seen Bob's work, it's troubling that you all but say it's somehow "less" than the non-computer based printing and darkroom work he did for years.

Never thought, felt, said, or implied that. Your phrase "all but say..." translates into a conclusion by you absent any supporting statements by me. I have nothing but the greatest respect for Bob (and Max). That's why I was asking their opinions. Stop trying to drive wedges.

BTW, Michaelangelo didn't chisel David by himself, no more than Old Masters works didn't rely on underpainters.

But he/they did use real chisels, didn't he/they? So sadly you again missed my point about real versus virtual entirely.

I was simply asking if the change in artistic tools from real to abstract might also cause a change in the final realization of the artist's vision. Because if it did, then that might also factor into the possible reconciliation between the two approaches. Nothing more.

If you look at my eclectic little collection of hobbiest photos on this site you'll see an antique storefront displayed together with a WWII bomber in flight. There's a reason that when I picked up the 4x5 I didn't head for the airshow. It's the same reason that when I picked up the Nikon F2 with an MD2/MB1 motor drive I didn't head for the antique store. The tools in hand alter the vision. Even for a non-artist like me.

But I think it's now time for me to excuse myself from this thread. Carry on, CGW...

Ken
 

coigach

Member
Joined
May 23, 2006
Messages
1,593
Location
Scotland
Format
Multi Format
But I think it's now time for me to excuse myself from this thread.
Ken

Ken, please don't go - we may have different views on hybrid, but I've enjoyed your thought-provoking contributions to this thread...
 

Diapositivo

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
3,257
Location
Rome, Italy
Format
35mm
BTW, Michaelangelo didn't chisel David by himself, no more than Old Masters works didn't rely on underpainters.

Is it really?
It is well known that Bernini had a workshops and statues generally attributed to him (such as those on the Ponte Sant'Angelo in Rome, or the ones on the Four Rivers Fountain) were actually designed by Bernini and sculpted by other sculptors, which are well known as sculptors of those works.

Antonio Raggi, Lazzaro Morelli, Paolo Naldini, Cosimo Fancelli, Girolamo Lucenti, Ercole Ferrata, Antonio Giorgetti, Domenico Guidi for the statues on the bridge, and Giovan Maria Franchi, Giacomo Fancelli (brother of Cosimo above), Claude Poussin and again Antonio Raggi for the Rivers are the well-known sculptors for those statues, carried on on design by Bernini. No such sculptors are known for Michelangelo's works to my (limited) knowledge.

I have never heard anything of the kind regarding Michelangelo, and gave for granted that his (relatively small) production was actually personally chiseled by him. I would not rule out that he made the design, some student made the "sbozzo", the raw work, and then the Master would make the real chiseling work. That would mean in any case that Michelangelo did actually chisel the Pietà, David, Moses etc. himself. Any pointer to further information regarding this is welcome.

Bernini himself did sculpt statues himself. For instance the Angelo con il cartiglio on Ponte Sant'Angelo was sculpted by Giulio Cartari and Bernini himself, another "copy", the original one of the Angelo con il cartiglio was sculpted by Bernini and his son, but was not paid by the pope and was kept by Bernini (there was some row over the interpretation of the agreement) and is now in the church Sant'Andrea delle Fratte. Same destiny for the Angelo con la corona di spine, the original sculpted by Bernini with his son was not delivered, the one which was delivered was the "copy" sculpted by Paolo Naldini. The Estasi di Santa Teresa is considered by Bernini and no aid name is known (again, some preparatory work might certainly have been performed by some aid).
 
OP
OP
Mainecoonmaniac
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
6,297
Format
Multi Format

mrred

Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
1,251
Location
Montreal, Ca
Format
Multi Format
Op...there are no photo police...we can do as we like.

Not true. Automatically censored to protect the morons that get burning eyes and vomit 360 degrees when anything digital get's mentioned. They should crawl back into the womb.

The bad thing is I enabled them by paying membership. No more.

I used to be in here every day. Maybe 4 times this year. Oh well.
 

Diapositivo

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
3,257
Location
Rome, Italy
Format
35mm
Not true. Automatically censored to protect the morons that get burning eyes and vomit 360 degrees when anything digital get's mentioned. They should crawl back into the womb.

The bad thing is I enabled them by paying membership. No more.

I used to be in here every day. Maybe 4 times this year. Oh well.

Policy has changed and this is now a hybrid-friendly and digital-friendly site. Sandboxes have been provided so that nobody seeks psychological support. Variety is the spice of life.
 

Dismayed

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
438
Location
Boston
Format
Med. Format RF
The world may be more colorful than you think it is. In addition to black, white and 18%... there are 253 other shades too! :laugh:

You beed greater bit depth.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom