DPUG is somewhat in beta still and quite neglected. There has been zero investment there for spreading any word and we hope to change that as soon as humanly possible. One reason for migrating APUG/DPUG to new robust infrastructure was to prepare for the coming DPUG push. The only thing that has been holding that back is time and finances. I recently sold my home and am moving to an area with a far lower cost of living, so am very excited to get back to having disposable income for things like getting DPUG rolling.
Thomas, I do have some questions for you though and I hope it's not taken the wrong way. What hybrid process do you use? If the final result of that hybrid process can be replicated 100% digitally... I am talking a side by side comparison is absolutely 100% indistinguishable. Would you still use the hybrid process or go with the 100% digital work flow? Would you make a digital negative and hand made carbon print, or would you make a digital carbon print using a new type of home based $200 10,000dpi 3D printer (the 3D printer enabling the "digital" carbon print to have the subtle telltale raised surface features of a traditional carbon print)? If both were 100% indistinguishable what would you use to create the final work? Maybe you will not say "the digital process", but I know a great many who would. When digital camera sensors can replicate the random halide of film and films rich 3 dimensional qualities to the point even a microscope can not discern the difference, would you still shoot film?
I'm fairly confident some/many hybrid folks will ditch hybrid as digital methods finally "get there" for them. When a 20x40inch 20,000 dpi dedicated B&W dye-sub print for $10 can look identical to a silver gelatin print or lambda based silver gelatin print, what will these hybrid users then choose? Should we cater to that base of photographers caught in between processes and change the entire site just for them? I'm not saying ALL hybrid users are in limbo, and I'm not intending to insult anyone who sees themselves as always using hybrid no matter what (because the love it and are passionate about it). Can you argue that most hybrid users are not in limbo simply waiting for the digital side to catch up, then they'll be off? Should that base of photographers in waiting be considered the saviors of analog photography? How much longer will they be around once digital hits several more levels of mind blowing improvements vs. the base of members on APUG who chose long ago that their form of photography is analog based and that is that?
The only argument I can really see is that exposing some to hybrid process may trigger their curiosity, and they'll convert more work flow to the analog side. Fair enough argument, but to suggest APUG has a duty to cater to this is asking too much -of any web community for that matter. Or to suggest APUG will be responsible for the death of traditional for not embracing digital is again putting the weight of the world on this small discussion board. And that again takes us back to DPUG which has a heavy hybrid slant, there is no reason a robust DPUG can not successfully open some eyes to traditional methods and contribute exactly what you say we need.
Sean,
Thank you for adding yet more to the discussion.
In order to attempt to answer your question - for me it doesn't matter how a print is made, based on viewing pleasure alone. I don't care one iota how others make their work. A good photo is a good photo. That's it. The rest is all about preference and enjoyment.
I hate working with digital, simply because I don't use my hands to create. It's a thing of caressing the materials with my own hands that matters to me. So I don't mind the making of a lith print using a digital negative, as long as I don't have to make the negative myself.
See, it doesn't matter if digital finally 'gets there' or not. As far as I'm concerned, it's already there. I choose different methods, because I love doing it. No other reason, other than proven archival stability of silver gelatin, or platinum, or gravure. Inkjet frankly makes me nervous at best.
I'm also not suggesting that APUG or DPUG is responsible for carrying the world of silver gelatin photography and its future. I think what I, and many others in this discussion, are simply alluding to the fact that we can do SOMETHING to help, by just changing how we operate. Bob is doing an excellent job by teaching digital photographers how to make fabulous silver gelatin lith prints from digital negatives. That encourages use of silver gelatin paper and chemistry. That's a good thing for all of us. The more people there are like that, the better the chances are of helping this art form survive. Whether that comes from DPUG, APUG, its members, or sponsors, or advertisers, or subscribers, I don't really care. But it is in our own best interest to do SOMETHING. Bob is getting people to print silver from digital. I have bought a few inexpensive but nice cameras and given them away to people that have shown an interest in photography. I have taught them how to process film and given them access to my darkroom to print. I send them film now and then along with encouragement to pursue a darkroom of their own. I know others that do the same.
I'm very happy to have caught your attention, because I feel it's an important matter, and together I think we can do the world of silver gelatin photography, both traditional and hybrid, a favor by exploring the possibilities, and get more people into using the amazing materials we have today, to increase the 'fan base'. We're all smart people here, and I think if we smash our foreheads together we have the opportunity to do something positive for the community, and indirectly affect the future of APUG as we know it today.