- Joined
- Oct 26, 2005
- Messages
- 67
- Format
- 35mm
Okay, I gotta ask, what university! (where you can major in photography, but get no text for an intro course!)TheDigitalMonster said:Unfortunately, the Photography program just acquired major status about 2 years ago at my University. snip We did not use texts in the class, as this was the largely the case, even though it was an intro class.
laz said:Okay, I gotta ask, what university! (where you can major in photography, but get no text for an intro course!)
Horenstein's "Beyond Basic Photography" is also a good book. I think there's a new edition out in the last year or two.katcall said:Hi Affe
I find Henry Horenstein's "Black and White Photography, A Basic Manual", to be a really useful book. It was on our required booklist when I did my studies a few years ago. It covers the camera body, camera lens, film exposure, film developing, the negative, making the print and alternative techniques to name a few. It is really easy to read and understand. Has plenty of examples and images to help you follow what is being said and how to do things. I think its a great book for someone starting out in black and white.
Good luck.
Kathy
Thomassauerwein said:I have the Adams trilogy someone gave me years ago. Will be happy to donate them to your cause. Never used them so they just sit there. probably, they would like a good home.
Printing is really easy once you have good negatives. All the reading in the world does no good unless you have questions that stem from testing to look for answers.
My suggestion is to shoot and process until you hate it then try again.
Nige said:welcome... but I think you need a new "name"
Okay, you're playing with fire now my boy! Step slowly back and just don't go there! <smiley face ommited>TheDigitalMonster said:I don't want to start a flame war, but digital is not "bad".
TheDigitalMonster said:I don't want to start a flame war, but digital is not "bad". Everything has its place. I feel that analog photography has much more validity in the realm of fine art. Digital, from a design production standpoint, allows for much faster, much more consistant results. By consistancy I do not mean that film cannot be, but with digital one KNOWS a needed shot came out immediately after it is taken.
TheDigitalMonster said:I don't want to start a flame war, but digital is not "bad". Everything has its place. I feel that analog photography has much more validity in the realm of fine art. Digital, from a design production standpoint, allows for much faster, much more consistant results. By consistancy I do not mean that film cannot be, but with digital one KNOWS a needed shot came out immediately after it is taken.
modafoto said:So digital is great for something and analog is great for something. Use the best tool for you.
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?