Playahz and Haytahz

[bjorke]

Okay kids, so which are you? Take a stand! Expand your ignore list!

The point of this poll: not what do YOU do, but WHAT SHOULD OTHERS BE ALLOWED TO DO. It's fun for the whole fandamnily®!!

 

[Art Vandalay]

I don't understand your question.

 

[bjorke]

I don't understand your question.

Art you are too danged fast, you read the first comment on this poll BEFORE THE POLL APPEARED! If internet time distortion isn't sneaky digital voodoo, I don't know what is.....

 

[Art Vandalay]

Art you are too danged fast, you read the first comment on this poll BEFORE THE POLL APPEARED! If internet time distortion isn't sneaky digital voodoo, I don't know what is.....

Oh shoot!! Sorry I thought something must have been missing.

I would prefer it if there were no scanning at all because it is digital. I vote that we mail the prints to each other, preferably by Pony Express

 

[John McCallum]

Whooooops! Rushed it, meant to vote for "Scanned prints only, potentially with some GLOBAL adjustments to contrast and levels" i.e make the scan look like the analogue print you have made. There ...... said it!!

Feels like coming clean about my political affiliations.

 

[rbarker]

As both a newcomer and a non-subscriber, I'm not sure I have a voice in this issue, but for B&W work, I kinda like "Scanned prints only, potentially with some GLOBAL adjustments to contrast and levels" - with spotting allowed - the objective being that the scan should match the print as closely as possible (consistent with the APUG spirit).

But, B&W negative scans with similar global adjustments and spotting don't bother me as long as they're identified as such, represent what (tentatively) would be done with the print, and are used primarily for discussion purposes (as opposed to representing final product).

I'm even more wishy-washy regarding scans of color work, as the transparency may be intended as the final product. Thus, a scan, adjusted and spotted as necessary to match the original transparency, would seem to be a reasonable representation of that work, and consistent with the spirit of APUG.

Bottom line, however, it still has to be an honor system guided by the spirit of the site.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

for B&W work, I kinda like "Scanned prints only, potentially with some GLOBAL adjustments to contrast and levels" - with spotting allowed - the objective being that the scan should match the print as closely as possible (consistent with the APUG spirit).

I agree with Ralph on this one. A print scan isn't necessarily going to produce a better representation of a print than a neg scan, at least for a silver print. Too much depends on the scanner one has access to. Also a neg scan and a print are both one generation away from the neg, while a print scan is two generations from the neg, so while a print scan has the potential to show the work of printmaking, it's another generation and will require its own manipulation.

Obviously if it's a print with a less uniform texture or handcoating artifacts or strong toning, then it makes more sense to try to scan the print.

The real thing, and the strength of APUG over most other photo sites, of course, is THE REAL THING (i.e., print exchanges, postcard exchange, traveling portfolio), and not what is in the online galleries.

 

[Graeme Hird]

I'd vote, but then I wouldn't be able to post ANY photos. I don't work in B&W and I only print after I've scanned my trannies.

The only pics I post on APUG are the scans that I've had no work to do on to make them acceptable as "photographs" (i.e. no dodging or burning or contrast control). It really restricts the number of photos I can show here, but that's fine. I'm happy to go with APUG's philosophy just so I can pick the brains of you people, and hopefully contribute something along the way.

(Found an option to suit me on closer inspection .... )

 

[arkoshkobash]

unless a posted image is intentionally deceptive, what harm can be done?

 

[Joe Lipka]

Well, I voted, but only because I felt it was my constitutional perogative to do so. While I do appreciate Bjorke's concern over the digital purity of APUG, I fear we are just turning a blind eye to the more serious problem of avatars.

Yes, fellow APUGGERs, what is of great concern to me is not the digital content of posts in the galleries, but that our avatars do not truly represent what we look like. So many of our members look like cameras, or chemical bottles. It is a constant wonder to me how the incumbent US President was elected when his picture appeared on multiple daily posts on APUG. Maybe the good old USA would be in better shape if the incumbent spent more time running the country than posting on APUG

I know that I look like my avatar. This is an issue that we need to address as a forum...

 

[Art Vandalay]

What really surprised me were how many voted for the last two choices!!

 

[jd callow]

What really surprised me were how many voted for the last two choices!!

most voters are from the usa. Did you catch the election results from Nov 2?

 

[Art Vandalay]

most voters are from the usa. Did you catch the election results from Nov 2?

Is that why you have egg on your face?

 

[anyte]

I'd vote but I can't be sure what is meant by some of the options - "global adjustments to contrast and levels" "spotting . . . local tweaking . . . wet darkroom" "tweaks ok . . . skilled darkroom artists". I don't know what "levels" are. I don't know what is meant by "tweaking". I don't know what is meant by "local" and "global".

I vote for scanning prints and negatives with a mininmal amount of PS - to make a scanned print more closely resemble the print and correcting the loss of detail that seems to be evident in scanning either negs or prints.

 

[Art Vandalay]

I'd vote but I can't be sure what is meant by some of the options - "global adjustments to contrast and levels" "spotting . . . local tweaking . . . wet darkroom" "tweaks ok . . . skilled darkroom artists". I don't know what "levels" are. I don't know what is meant by "tweaking". I don't know what is meant by "local" and "global".

I vote for scanning prints and negatives with a mininmal amount of PS - to make a scanned print more closely resemble the print and correcting the loss of detail that seems to be evident in scanning either negs or prints.

Although I'm pretty sure I'm on your ignore list, there's no reason for you to remain ignorant of these terms so here goes.

Global - the entire image area - eg adjusting contrast of the whole print and not just one location. You are for this.

Local Tweaking - the opposite of global eg dodging and/or burning on area - you'd be against this

Spotting - getting rid of spots of dust or dirt - can do this on the print or scan. You might oppose this.

Levels - in PS the entire white to black spectrum is divided into 3 broad levels white, grey and black. You can adjust them seperately. You'd be against this as well.

 

[Art Vandalay]

PS you'd be in the 2nd or 3rd category.

 

[jovo]

After NOvember 2nd, I'm amazed I'm in the majority about anything at all.

 

[Bob F.]

I voted, but the options don't quite reflect my feelings: "Scanned negative, print or tranparency with only global brightness/contrast and spotting"...

Incidently, what about scanned prints that were printed to dot-matrix via PS?....

<Insert HM Queen Elizabeth II accent>

"Ay herebye declarrr thyss can of worms aypen"...

<End accent>

Cheers, Bob.

 

[bmac]

Interesting poll. just one question, am I a PLAYAH or a HAYTAH?

 

[jim kirk jr.]

Yes, fellow APUGGERs, what is of great concern to me is not the digital content of posts in the galleries, but that our avatars do not truly represent what we look like. So many of our members look like cameras, or chemical bottles.

I know that I look like my avatar. This is an issue that we need to address as a forum...

Wait,so I'm not a falling to pieces ruin with a whole in the middle and a bunch of vines tangled all over the top of me....

 

[BruceN]

I guess I'm in category two, as far as black and white goes. For color I usually shoot Velvia, then scan it, adjust it as necessary for printing, then have it printed either on an Epson, Chromira or LightJet. So I guess that puts me in the second to last category for color work.

As far as Nov 2nd goes - at least I'm still in the majority for something.

 

[jim kirk jr.]

Oops!
I voted for number two-I did what I was told not to do and voted for what I do...maybe I am a falling to pieces ruin with a whole in the middle and tangled vines
on top....
Number four sounds good to me....I prefer to make my scans look as close as possible to the original print.Otherwise what's the point of posting them in the first place?

 

[bjorke]

RESULTS

As of noon PST, Friday 19 November:

• Total Votes: 64
• Playahz: 13
• Haytahz: 51

 

[kswatapug]

Interesting poll. I am not certain whether a vote cast is for "what should be on APUG" or "how I approach my own work."

The two responses would differ. As I find this site to be an oasis for traditional photographers that celebrates the analog processes they use to translate their personal vision, attempts to keep it focused on relevant discussion are justified. I haven't had access to a traditional darkroom in years, but I appreciate the passion that individuals like those posting on this site have for their work and their efforts to perpetuate the craft.

I think, while challenging, efforts to keep the site free from mention of the "d" word are a worthwhile pursuit, and the gray area subforum is a rational solution to the conundrum. I find the anti-"d" hostility that often rears its ugly head counterproductive, akin to the mentality of a radical fringe group, even racist to some degree. Interestingly, I've not noted similarly hostile feelings from the "other" camp. Instead, their is in large part, an appreciation for the "traditional methods." But, perhaps a hostile posture is what some members of the photographic community feels is appropriate. What drives the contemporary trends is commerce. IMO, this community is more concerned with the art of photography, the aesthetics of creativity and the joy of the human endeavor.

It seems to me that if the joy of this pursuit is perpetuated, this community should only grow larger, and the future should be brighter.

If the poll is about requirements for posting images to the site, the best suggested requirement I have seen offered was posted by Francesco, where he said something along the lines of, at the least, the print has to have been souped. With the increasing amount of overlap between the "d" world and the analog world, this seems to be the clearest distinction and easily sets this group apart from the rest of the world.

Respectfully...

 

[clogz]

No mystics? How remarkable.