Is this sacrilege?

[Mainecoonmaniac]

What a rude comment.

I guess we're all losers if we have to post analog images in the internet.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

 

[DREW WILEY]

So why does everyone pounce on me for NOT posting them ?????

 

[klownshed]

A hybrid system is the first obvious step into film photography.

Before I had a working darkroom I had already been developing my own film for quite a while. Scanning is a valuable tool, whether you print in the darkroom or not.

I scan every single negative. I print the best ones. And by best I mean the ones I like the look of, not ones I've measured to be the correct density.

I originally came to these forums for tips, tricks and advice.

Thankfully there are many wonderful, talented photographers that are happy to help encourage people to shoot/develop/print film.

And I've learnt a lot from numerous threads, most of which I have not even participated in. And I am thankful for the level of expertise that is willingly shared.

There are unfortunately also a load of pious, pompous kurmudgeons happier to criticise and condescend than encourage. Happier to measure the quality of their photos with a densitometer rather than artistic values. The film equivalent of the measurebators every other photography forum is overflowing and afflicted with.

And to them I say: Nothing. As my old man used to say. They're like a piece of sh*t. The more you poke it the more it stinks.*

The poor chaps probably just need a nice hug and warm mug of cocoa to cheer them up.

;-)

Ps. Be happy and Live and let live.

*it sounded better in Italian

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Ps. Be happy and Live and let live.

+1

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

A hybrid system is the first obvious step into film photography.

Before I had a working darkroom I had already been developing my own film for quite a while. Scanning is a valuable tool, whether you print in the darkroom or not.

I scan every single negative. I print the best ones. And by best I mean the ones I like the look of, not ones I've measured to be the correct density.

I originally came to these forums for tips, tricks and advice.

Thankfully there are many wonderful, talented photographers that are happy to help encourage people to shoot/develop/print film.

And I've learnt a lot from numerous threads, most of which I have not even participated in. And I am thankful for the level of expertise that is willingly shared.

There are unfortunately also a load of pious, pompous kurmudgeons happier to criticise and condescend than encourage. Happier to measure the quality of their photos with a densitometer rather than artistic values. The film equivalent of the measurebators every other photography forum is overflowing and afflicted with.

And to them I say: Nothing. As my old man used to say. They're like a piece of sh*t. The more you poke it the more it stinks.*

The poor chaps probably just need a nice hug and warm mug of cocoa to cheer them up.

;-)

Ps. Be happy and Live and let live.

*it sounded better in Italian

I scan all my negatives as well. It has drastically cut back on wasting materials in the darkroom. What a great tool!

 

[DREW WILEY]

Whatever happened to a basic light box and a magnifier? It's about a thousand times faster than a scan if you're just trying to decide which negs to keep and which to toss.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Oh I still do that as well, before they get scanned. Sometimes I'll just take a photo of the negative with my phone and invert it. I look at them when I'm bored. The technology is there, so why can't we use it?? I don't toss negatives anymore. I keep them as them make great supports for carbon tissue!

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ha! I keep certain bad negs (unless they are physically damaged) because sometimes I learn some new printing trick that makes em good negs.
Once in awhile I'll do a scan of color negs if I need to show them to someone else prior to printing. Otherwise, one ultimately never really knows the
potential of a shot until you fuss with it in the darkroom. Sometimes what I think will be a piece of cake to print turns out to be a bear; and the neg I was dreading becomes a hole in one. Whatever workflow you enjoy; that's all that counts.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Yes, and also it's amazing finding hidden compositions in those old "useless" negatives...just not the ones with pigmented gelatine stains on them!

 

[summicron1]

You guys need to loosen up. He's saying that you should feel free to try new stuff, and says black and white film is just the stuff to do it with. His advice on over exposure is spot on -- Kodak sold cameras with one setting that would have failed if not for the ability of film to do exactly what he says it can.

And he's encouraging folks to learn how their film works. I see this blog, in short, as nothing but positive.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

no, negative....

 

[Rlibersky]

You guys need to loosen up. He's saying that you should feel free to try new stuff, and says black and white film is just the stuff to do it with. His advice on over exposure is spot on -- Kodak sold cameras with one setting that would have failed if not for the ability of film to do exactly what he says it can.

And he's encouraging folks to learn how their film works. I see this blog, in short, as nothing but positive.

It seems to me he is getting exactly what he wants. Otherwise he would have used a different title. To bad this thread isn't happening in his comment section.

I look at like a 2 cycle engine. If it calls for a 50:1 ratio it will still work at 40:1 or 60:1, just not as smoothly.

Randy

 

[rpavich]

People love evangelists who always are certain of everything. Faith is vital. Doubters clearly need educating to embrace the warmth that the truth can provide

pentaxuser

Are you certain of that?

 

[derelict]

Whatever happened to a basic light box and a magnifier? It's about a thousand times faster than a scan if you're just trying to decide which negs to keep and which to toss.

I think it is what is available to you. I do not have a loupe or a light box. I do have a scanner and negative holders and a preview scan only takes about 30 seconds and from there I can decide which to keep and which to trash. But, you know, I should be over on DPUG with that kind of work flow.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Oh, I guess preview scanning is so common a practice that nobody will lynch you. But it really interposes a degree of fuss that is generally unnecessary, unless you enjoy it for its own sake. But I feel the same way about contact proof sheets, which were used for generations.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Here's a quote from Saint Adams "I am sure the next step will be the electronic image, and I hope I shall live to see it. I trust that the creative eye will continue to function, whatever technological innovations may develop." - Ansel Adams - 1983

 

[Bob Carnie]

Whatever happened to a basic light box and a magnifier? It's about a thousand times faster than a scan if you're just trying to decide which negs to keep and which to toss.

Actually I use the magnifier for checking negative quality, sharpness, cleanleness and so on.
I like the scan for future reference when building together a show.

Even in the days of contact sheets I would still take the loupe to the negative to verify it worthy of printing.

 

[derelict]

Here's a quote from Saint Adams "I am sure the next step will be the electronic image, and I hope I shall live to see it. I trust that the creative eye will continue to function, whatever technological innovations may develop." - Ansel Adams - 1983

Whoa, good thing he is not around anymore. He might have been banned.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Whoa, good thing he is not around anymore. He might have been banned.

good point

 

[DREW WILEY]

Of course, he never would have been St Ansel in the first place if that had been the case. He'd be just another geek behind a Starbucks counter who got a bent nose from stirring lattes with it instead of pressing it against a groundglass.

 

[ced]

John your father's comment to you made me laugh and reminded me of some Italian sales guys that used to come with clients to our offices and often heard us telling someone they were talking "bullshit",
this became to be misunderstood in translation and they would say it is a "bowl of shit".
Please excuse my french...