GreyWolf said:Do you know what I am missing in my traditional darkroom?
The EDIT ---> UNDO key !
In 2017 Michael Kenna talked about digital being too easy and unappealing.
I used to just develop my film, then scan it and inkjet print it. Looked OK to me, and other people liked the prints. But the idea of working IN THE DARK, or nearly so, almost terrified me. It seemed so impossible. All that equipment to buy, didn't I need a real darkroom? How do I wash the prints? What about chemical fumes? On and on and on.
Then I spent about $60 for an old enlarger w/ an 8x10 easel, bought trays and salad tongs from Walmart, and invested $14 in a red bulb and thermometer from Freestyle. Bought the papers and chemicals, used the bedroom to print, and had large storage bins for my wash water and holding tank. Final wash was in the bathtub, and I hung the prints to dry in there as well. It worked!
It was actually easier and a whole lot more fun that staring at the monitor watching a print come out of the printer, only to see it clog on the last half inch. Getting good prints requires keeping notes and making a lot of mistakes, don't get me wrong. But if you stick w/ it, it's fun, and the prints get better and better. Who knew? And yes, they look much nicer than those inkjet prints. It feels good to do the entire process myself, from snapping the shutter to flattening the fiber prints.
I was reading the latest issue of Black & White Photography (by the way -way to go Jorge! loved it! and thanks Ailsa for the copy!)
All was well until I turned to the Letters to the editor section. I haven't seen issue 24 but apparently some poor guy mentioned in that issue, that he believed digital imaging is a different art form than photography. The digital camp of course went berserk and wrote several letters defending thier medium in this current issue. But the one thing that stood out and almost gave me a migrane, were the comments regarding some of their mentalities for going digital. I got the impression that many went digital because they could not cope with or have any success with wet methods. I can't understand this. I processed my first roll of film when I was 16 with zero experience, and I also made a rather nice black and white print in the highschool darkroom of that image. I did not find this hard, cumbersome, inconvenient, annoying, frustrating, or difficult in any way! I actually found it magical. I ummmm, simply followed basic directions to achieve this result! BASIC! Mix this with that, pour this into that for x minutes. Wow, that is soooooo hard isn't it??? But apparently scores and scores of "photographers" can't produce work they are satisfied with by using these methods, and thanks to digital one reader says they have a "new lease of life in photography". I'm dumbfounded that people find wet methods so difficult that they must rely on computers to give them the means to be "photographers". I am no master in the darkroom, but the results I achieve are my own and that means a hell of a lot. If computer aided photography can improve my results shouldn't I go with that? Never.
(as usual thanks for letting me blow off some steam)
Good photography is about content and composition. It's not about method.
Absolutely. I'm old enough that photography was just film-based until nearly my 30s. Now I do both for different reasons and feel no need to arbitrarily limit myself to one or the other. The blending of the two is also a neat twist that wasn't apparent to me until recently.Now that we’ve been through even digital cameras’ rise and fall, the photographic community realizes that either is a viable artistic medium they can choose from to suit their photographic tastes. Neither is superior, but just different like oil and acrylic. In addition, digital technology can be incorporated in the workflow to complement analog and vice versa. It’s a wonderful new era to be into photography.
Going back to the dark ages, 2003 I did not own a digital camera, I think my flip phone of the day may have had a camera, never used it. At the time I would said I would not want to own a digital camera, spent most of my day working looking at a computer screen. Now I own, 7 digital cameras, Sigma, Pentax, and Sony. I shoot film about 80% of the time, no longer travel overseas with film as I don't to take the risk that my film will be fogged. I sometime use a digital camera as a light meter when shooting M and LF, shoot sports and wildlife with digital and film, digital for low light. Lately, due to the cost of color film and processing I shoot digital for color. In 2003 I could get a roll of rebranded 35mm Fuji 100 for couple of dollars, developed at a mini lab for a dollar and print at home. My personal taste is not to overprocess a digital image, current Corel Aftershot does a good job of creating film like digital images. I could live with either, what I like about film is the process, taking the picture, developing and printing, I find it relaxing.
Then let him take pictures with one hand tied in his back.In 2017 Michael Kenna talked about digital being too easy and unappealing.
Then let him take pictures with one hand tied in his back.
In 2017 Michael Kenna talked about digital being too easy and unappealing.
Then let him take pictures with one hand tied in his back.
Just to be clear: I do 95% silver photography. Because I enjoy it. Right now a strip of Legacy Pro 400, exposed in an Oly 35RC, is drying.
I don't buy into this kind of elitist attitude. The invective, sometimes abuse (not at me, but reading that was bad enough), from some film purists almost drove me off Apug.
Photography has been givena false difficulty to it, mainly by
1. people who have no clue about it, and want to create a mystique on it
2. people who do things, but need a means to make themselves seem to be more then they are by creating a mystique about it.
Zombie thread but what the heck...I also dig how I can use vintage lenses with mirrorless cameras. I can get some interesting shots with that combination and keep old glass making images even if I don't have film.
Photography has been givena false difficulty to it, mainly by
...
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?