Message for Simon of Harman/ Ilford

[Paul.]

Dear Simon,

Please can you have a few choise words with your fellow director Steven Brierley regarding his interview published in AP. where in he states "the home darkroom of the traditional enthusiast has gone".

There may well be less of us than in the halsion days of yore but there are still many of us arround and we spend not inconsiderable ammounts on materials a lot of them Ilford products. Seems Steven has had a fit of biteing one of the hands that feed him, unless of course he does not want my business.

Regards Paul.

 

[Jon Shiu]

Here is the link to the interview, in case anyone is interested:
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u..._darkroom_renaissance_update_news_290282.html


Jon

 

[clayne]

Yeah, I found that statement to be a bit far reaching. If anything the commercial darkroom would diminish quicker than the home. I get the gist of what he's saying - but others may not and I think that's what some people are taking issue with.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I had missed that comment when I read the article for the first time. It does seem rather odd considering Harman Technology's support of APUG.

Tom

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Dear Simon,

Please can you have a few choice words with your fellow director Steven Brierley regarding his interview published in AP. where in he states "The home darkroom of the traditional enthusiast has gone".

There may well be less of us than in the halcyon days of yore but there are still many of us around and we spend not inconsiderable amounts on materials a lot of them Ilford products. Seems Steven has had a fit of biting one of the hands that feed him, unless of course he does not want my business.

Regards Paul.

Well said Paul. Perhaps Simon will point Mr. Brierley to this thread and ask him to explain this comment.

 

[Eric Rose]

Before we all get in a tizzy lets take a breath. I think it's more about interpretation than anything else. Back in the 50's, 60's and 70's many amateur photographers had darkrooms. Both purpose built and bathroom types. Now we see that most amateur photographers are tooting around digi cams. Hence the rapid demise of darkrooms being used by amateurs.

We on APUG are a minority. We may think we create a big wave but in the grand scheme of things it's more like a ripple.

So to now interpret what was said, the "traditional" enthusiast.
What is that today? It's the digi shooters not us. We are now classified as non-traditioinal as the tradition for the past number of years has been for people to pick up a digi camera rather than a film camera. The traditioinal enthusiast does not use a home darkroom. However the non-traditional film photographers still do.

Naturally if you take a broader view of things then the definition of traditional and non-traditional flips, but that is not the context in which Steven Brierley was asked the question in.

So lets all settle down and just enjoy our uniqueness. Just MHO.

 

[eclarke]

Way to go!! Let's get indignant with our lifeline and our only friend here from Ilford...Evan Clarke

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Before we all get in a tizzy lets take a breath. I think it's more about interpretation than anything else. Back in the 50's, 60's and 70's many amateur photographers had darkrooms. Both purpose built and bathroom types. Now we see that most amateur photographers are tooting around digi cams. Hence the rapid demise of darkrooms being used by amateurs.

We on APUG are a minority. We may think we create a big wave but in the grand scheme of things it's more like a ripple.

So to now interpret what was said, the "traditional" enthusiast.
What is that today? It's the digi shooters not us. We are now classified as non-traditioinal as the tradition for the past number of years has been for people to pick up a digi camera rather than a film camera. The traditioinal enthusiast does not use a home darkroom. However the non-traditional film photographers still do.

Naturally if you take a broader view of things then the definition of traditional and non-traditional flips, but that is not the context in which Steven Brierley was asked the question in.

So lets all settle down and just enjoy our uniqueness. Just MHO.

A good post Eric. I wonder how much in percentage or value terms the visible active online person on APUG or other forums represents in the analogue materials market. The apparent success of Harman's processing service indicates a certain interest in trying black & white photography from people without access to (or interest in) darkroom set-ups, but how many of those will go on to buy fibre base photographic paper?


Tom

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Before we all get in a tizzy lets take a breath. I think it's more about interpretation than anything else. Back in the 50's, 60's and 70's many amateur photographers had darkrooms. Both purpose built and bathroom types. Now we see that most amateur photographers are tooting around digi cams. Hence the rapid demise of darkrooms being used by amateurs.

We on APUG are a minority. We may think we create a big wave but in the grand scheme of things it's more like a ripple.

So to now interpret what was said, the "traditional" enthusiast.
What is that today? It's the digi shooters not us. We are now classified as non-traditioinal as the tradition for the past number of years has been for people to pick up a digi camera rather than a film camera. The traditioinal enthusiast does not use a home darkroom. However the non-traditional film photographers still do.

Naturally if you take a broader view of things then the definition of traditional and non-traditional flips, but that is not the context in which Steven Brierley was asked the question in.

So lets all settle down and just enjoy our uniqueness. Just MHO.

A good point, but the magazine journalist might have misquoted what Stephen Brierly actually said, which is why I suggested that Simon pointed him towards this thread so that he can explain the comment made in the link.

 

[clayne]

The fact of the matter is this:

"The home darkroom of the traditional enthusiast has gone".

Is not an accurate statement - regardless of how much it may be observed from a relative standpoint. Do you think Joe Blow 20 year old is going to know the difference between truth and relative truth when it comes to darkroom use? There's 1000s of people here, and probably 1000s not here on APUG who are printing in the darkroom. An Ilford director/rep/etc. should choose those specific words a bit more thoughtfully - seeing as many of us help pay their bills.

 

[John R.]

With all due respect Eric, but since when has a film based photographer been classified as "Non-traditional"? Quite to the contrary ..... we are as traditional. as it gets. A tradition characteristic in this medium builds over many, many years and decades. It is not a product of a recent modern shift or trend. I understand what you are trying to say but please do not confuse the recent years of digital growth with the long standing deep rooted tradition of analog imaging. It's not even remotely comparable. It's not a matter of taking a broader view of things, it is simply a matter of history. I am not trying to be confrontational it's a matter of being clear on what establishes tradition. I think anyone knows full well darkrooms have diminished but at the same time so have many digital shooters and computer users. I think we all know full well what the comments in the article are saying but it probably could have been said in a better way. We all know full well where Ilford stands, they don't make their investments for nothing, the labs and user loyalty are around and they know it's not going anywhere and will be around long after we are gone.

 

[tim_bessell]

I would call digital photography MainStream, it is popular and widely used. In relative terms, compared to analog photography, it is Not long-established, and won't be until such a time as the next major form of 'photography' comes along.

Would you call using a desktop computer a tradition? A digital cam is a very specialized computer.

 

[Ektagraphic]

This guy doesn't know his @$$ from his elbow. The article starts off by saying 'There is still a passion about the darkroom,' said Ilford Photo sales director

 

[railwayman3]

Seems that most of the interview as quoted is a typical popular journalism (as in "AP") bodge, which contains more-or-less nothing when you read it properly.
I stopped wasting money buying that esteemed weekly journal when I found APUG and other similar useful groups on the web.

 

[Eric Rose]

John I see your point however in today's fast paced world all time frames are compressed. Here is the dictionary definition of traditional:

traditional - adjective
/trəˈdɪʃ.ən.əl/, /-ˈdɪʃ.nəl/ adj
following or belonging to the customs or ways of behaving that have continued in a group of people or society for a long time without changing.

What is a long time? To a twenty year old it's measured in a matter of months. To us old buggers it's measured in decades. I was simply compressing the "long time" aspect of things to meet the expectations of the modern media. It was an attempt to frame the comments based on the intended audience not necessarily to agree with them.

And yes there may be thousands of us here and others meeting in darkened basements keeping the faith alive. There are also 100's of thousands of digi users out there. Many of which now rely on their cellphone cameras as the primary image capture device. So to again put it into perspective we are the pimple on the elephants ass.

I've used Ilford products for years (decades actually) and have waxed poetically to my students about it's qualities and the support we get from Ilford. To bad I just can't afford to buy as much of it as I want these days.

 

[johnnywalker]

I think it's a rather thoughtless statement. If "the home darkroom of the traditional enthusiast has gone", Ilford must be fast on the road to nowhere itself. There doesn't seem to be a lot of commercial darkrooms around, so where is Ilford's market?

 

[EASmithV]

This makes me furious

 

[Jeff L]

I haven't seen Simon post in quite awhile. Have I just not seen them?
Jeff

 

[Mark Fisher]

He may have overstated things a bit, but there is a reason that you can get enlargers for free. I would appreciate Simon or his colleague jump into this thread though. Statements like that make me nervous.

 

[jgjbowen]

Good luck reaching Simon....his last post was July 23rd. I hope he is well, but he hasn't exactly been active on APUG for 3 months now.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

He may not have posted recently, but he's viewed the forum as recently as today.

 

[bill schwab]

Don't tell my darkroom it's gone... I just ordered a case of 11x14 Ilford paper this afternoon!

 

[sanking]

John I see your point however in today's fast paced world all time frames are compressed. Here is the dictionary definition of traditional:

traditional - adjective
/trəˈdɪʃ.ən.əl/, /-ˈdɪʃ.nəl/ adj
following or belonging to the customs or ways of behaving that have continued in a group of people or society for a long time without changing.

I remember message exchanges on photography forums such as the alt photo process list in the mid to late 1990s where inkjet digital printing was referred to as "alternative photography." Four or five years later digital inkjet printing had become the more ubiquitous method of printing and silver gelatin printing had become in essence "an alternative process."

Sandy King

 

[Curt]

The larger question is why isn't Simon interacting here anymore. I haven't heard from him since before the uproar over price increases. Who is the spokesperson for Harman/Ilford or have they gone Kodak on us?

 

[papagene]

It may have been a dumb statement, but in the larger scheme of things it isn't so bad. It ain't something to get our undies all tied up in knots. And we really don't need to get Ilford/Harmon PO'd at APUG.
Just my $0.02 worth.

gene