Needed: The Many Forms of Analog

[jd callow]

We need to finish and publish the Apug Conference details. Afterwards I will be updating the 5k Print Competition.

Whilst we work on the conference details, I am asking for your help in compiling some information for the print competition.

One of the issues with an analog print competition is that it is too often defined by what it is not. I am resigned to the fact that I am obliged to state all the digital processes that are not allowed, but I refuse to limit the description there.

If you would be as kind as to post all the possible forms of an analog print and a summary of the path taken to achieve the print I would be very grateful.

I suspect we may all learn a thing or two in the process.


Mr Callow

 

[jjstafford]

[...]

If you would be as kind as to post all the possible forms of an analog print and a summary of the path taken to achieve the print I would be very grateful.

I suspect we may all learn a thing or two in the process.
Mr Callow

Reading the above I experienced the tiny seed of panic some philosphy instructors live to create in their students. Okay, no Sophistry, Parmenideans, Modal freakouts here.

Please consider including shadowgrams made using POP, or conventional chemical development as analog photographs.

 

[jd callow]

Reading the above I experienced the tiny seed of panic some philosphy instructors live to create in their students. Okay, no Sophistry, Parmenideans, Modal freakouts here.

Please consider including shadowgrams made using POP, or conventional chemical development as analog photographs.

Could you elaborate? Is a shadowgram the same as a photogram?

 

[jjstafford]

Could you elaborate? Is a shadowgram the same as a photogram?

Yes, Sir. That is what I meant. Thanks.

 

[Sean]

There is a reaally good rundown on wikipedia complete with links and descriptions to analog processes. Let me know if you can't find it and I'll dig it up..

 

[Alex Hawley]

One analog method that gets into digital trouble is the three Polaroid manipulations; SX-70 manipulation, emulsion transfer, and emulsion lift.

The three processes by themselves are all analog. Problem is, they yield a one-of-a-kind result. They could be copied with film and a copy camera, but this negates printing the dupes on watercolor paper.

One has to resort to scanning the original, then printing it with an inkjet. So I suppose this falls into the same realm as an enlarged digital negative. The originals could be entered in the contest but they tend to be kind of small (unless you're lucky, or wealthy, enough, to have an 8x10 polaroid processor). But I feel like parting with the originals is like parting with a good negative - it might not come back in good shape.

 

[jd callow]

Yes, but the polaroid is most assuredly analog, very cool and permissable in the print competition.

Thanks the POP and Polaroid are good additions.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Yes, but the polaroid is most assuredly analog, very cool and permissable in the print competition.

Thanks the POP and Polaroid are good additions.

John, is the Polaroid permissible even if enlarged? Just double-checking.

 

[jd callow]

Yes! Slide to polaroid, copy neg of a polaroid enlarged, 55 neg enlarged, paper neg made from an emulsion transfer and printed to an R-print or ciba -- Am I missing anything?

As it is I am going to change the print sizes in the rules to include polaroids.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Got it John. Thanks!

 

[Jeremy]

The originals could be entered in the contest but they tend to be kind of small (unless you're lucky, or wealthy, enough, to have an 8x10 polaroid processor).

The original is actually too small to enter: the minimum size is 4x5 for the contest.

 

[jd callow]

I'll fix it to allow any Polaroid size...

 

[Jeremy]

I'll fix it to allow any Polaroid size...

How about any Alt Process size in general? (Asks the guy who shoots 3.25x4.25 and contacts prints in pd)

 

[jd callow]

How about any Alt Process size in general? (Asks the guy who shoots 3.25x4.25 and contacts prints in pd)

All sizes of contacts are allowed even if it is from a disk camera, its already in the rules.

 

[livemoa]

I assume that print on a senstised surface (glass, fabric, stone etc) are analog.

What about film neg, scan, generate new negative (enlarged for instance, or scratches removed) and then printed. I know some Alt process peolp do this.

 

[jd callow]

I assume that print on a senstised surface (glass, fabric, stone etc) are analog.

This would be very acceptable and I would like to know more.

What about film neg, scan, generate new negative (enlarged for instance, or scratches removed) and then printed. I know some Alt process peolp do this.

For the purposes of the competition the process that creates the print has to be all analog.

 

[liza]

never ending story it seems

To end this boring discussion regarding what is or not, just state " -all photographic material entering this competition should be produced -100% traditional, hands on craftmanship" All who is a member on APUG understand this or they have come to the wrong forum.
Eva

 

[jd callow]

Eva,
You are correct but, the idea of this thread was to dig a little deeper into analog.

To beat the digital horse is boring, but to hear about how to create a glass print or to be reminded of processes you haven't heard of or tried in 10 years shouldn't be boring.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Platinum/palladium
Ziatype
VanDyke
Cyanotype
Albumen
Salted Paper prints
Carbon
Carbro
Pigment/color carbon
Fresson (hey, you never know)
Gum bichromate
Daguerreotype
ambrotype
combined processes
hand coloring and oil over photograph
dye matrix
photogravure
autochrome
kallitype/calotype
bromoil
and I'm sure there are more I'm leaving out

 

[liza]

Of course you are right. But, it was the discussion about scan/ink-laserprinting I´m so sick to hear in these discussions. So if that one is gone (wich was my intention), the thread can focus on all those beautiful known and/or almost forgotten processes.
I´m very interested to know where to put my Mordancages. Some say they are to be considered as Alt pro some say thet are not.
All the best Eva

 

[smieglitz]

...
and I'm sure there are more I'm leaving out

Tintype/Ferrotype/Melainotype
Chrysotype
Anthotype
dusted-on

 

[jd callow]

Of course you are right. But, it was the discussion about scan/ink-laserprinting I´m so sick to hear in these discussions. So if that one is gone (wich was my intention), the thread can focus on all those beautiful known and/or almost forgotten processes.
I´m very interested to know where to put my Mordancages. Some say they are to be considered as Alt pro some say thet are not.
All the best Eva

Here is the cool thing about this. It will be your call. The alt process cat is for those who feel their process is out of the main stream and want their art viewed that way. If you do lith and want to be judged with c-prints fine.

Mordancages, from what i know is an altered neg (yes?) and then an enlargement or contact. In my mind it would depend upon the degree of alteration and how I felt about the work in relation to (really) traditional prints.

 

[jd callow]

Thank you David, smieglitz. You are free to elaborate...

 

[Jeremy]

Mordancages, from what i know is an altered neg (yes?) and then an enlargement or contact.

Nope....

http://www.jonathan-bailey.com/pages/writings_mord.html

 

[jd callow]

Nope....

http://www.jonathan-bailey.com/pages/writings_mord.html

Yep. I was wrong. I personally would call it alt, but...