Scanning ethics ????

[Erik Petersson]

Well, I finally uploaded a few pictures from scanned negatives.

Cesaraugusta, I don't look down on wet development. I admire it, and I think that most do the same.

 

[paulie]

If I recall, there was once room for differing opinions on the forum. It would sadden me to learn that I am no longer allowed to post my own opinion, and that I must agree not to disagree to avoid being harassed.

i agree there are plenty of so called photography forums that are run like a police state, apug has avoided such temptations so far

A bathroom is equipped with all the necessary fittings, including being spill-resistant and easily cleaned.

Many moons ago, i spilled some developer on a bedroom carpet. It had to be taken out and replaced.

i live in stupid england and they seem to like putting carpets in bathrooms , so a spill is going to be bad anywhere in my crummy apartment

 

[coigach]

If it's not worth printing, it's not worth scanning and uploading to the gallery.

I say scan the print. Period.

I shoot transparencies 100% of the time (b+w dr5 reverse processed). These are my 'finished' work, not a print. Does that mean that I shouldn't scan these for posting to the gallery?

Cheers,
Gavin

 

[Q.G.]

Sounds very much like some would like to ban the gallery from APUG. Too Hybridphoto, i guess...

Perhaps they should also use a quill and ink to share their thoughts about this thread's topic?
:confused:

 

[removed account4]

If it's not worth printing, it's not worth scanning and uploading to the gallery.

I say scan the print. Period.

i spent the better part of 4 hours yesterday and today
scanning two 11x14 prints .. well it is on 11x14 photo paper
and a border. unfortunately for me, my scanner's glass is not that big
so i had to scan in pieces .. first the sides, then top and bottom to
see which i could puzzle together better. 4 hours i spent doing this
( and i have been using PS since the 1990s ) and unfortunately i wasn't
able to hide where things met. it just "looks funny" ...
so i searched my film for 2 hours this morning, found the negatives
and now i have spent the last hour ( or more ) scanning these 2 .. now
four frames. i hate scanning prints ...

 

[anon12345]

i spent the better part of 4 hours yesterday and today
scanning two 11x14 prints .. well it is on 11x14 photo paper
and a border. unfortunately for me, my scanner's glass is not that big
so i had to scan in pieces .. first the sides, then top and bottom to
see which i could puzzle together better. 4 hours i spent doing this
( and i have been using PS since the 1990s ) and unfortunately i wasn't
able to hide where things met. it just "looks funny" ...
so i searched my film for 2 hours this morning, found the negatives
and now i have spent the last hour ( or more ) scanning these 2 .. now
four frames. i hate scanning prints ...

A suggestion . . . photograph the print. This can be accomplished digitally as well as with a film camera. The practice involves lighting the print from the sides at an appropriate angle as to minimize glare.

 

[Q.G.]

A suggestion . . . photograph the print. This can be accomplished digitally as well as with a film camera. The practice involves lighting the print from the sides at an appropriate angle as to minimize glare.

Yes...

And then you print the photo of the print, scan it, and post the result in APUG's gallery.

Oh! Wait a minute...!
:confused:

 

[removed account4]

A suggestion . . . photograph the print. This can be accomplished digitally as well as with a film camera. The practice involves lighting the print from the sides at an appropriate angle as to minimize glare.

i have done copy work for 20 years
and i don't really see the point of
photographing the print
when it is easier and faster
and less of a hassle to
scan the film.
the point isn't to make 2 or 3 times as much work for oneself
just to say that it was a print, the point is to make a replica
of the image. maybe in a perfect world making copy images ( film or whatever ) works
but i don't live in a perfect world, with lots of time on my hands.

 

[anon12345]

. . . .
the point isn't to make 2 or 3 times as much work for oneself
just to say that it was a print, the point is to make a replica
of the image. maybe in a perfect world making copy images ( film or whatever ) works
but i don't live in a perfect world, with lots of time on my hands.

The point of my suggestion was to get a digital image of the print with a camera. What do you get by scanning the print on a scanner? . . . a digital image of the print. Another suggestion is to purchase a scanner of the appropriate size. But I'm sure that suggestion can be shot down for some lame excuse also. Here you go, farm out the work to someone who can.

PS: Apparently somebody has enough time to copy prints on a scanner that is too small. Merging segments of scanned images from scanners is easy with some experience. The experience will come with time.

 

[Andy K]

 

[removed account4]

The point of my suggestion was to get a digital image of the print with a camera. What do you get by scanning the print on a scanner? . . . a digital image of the print. Another suggestion is to purchase a scanner of the appropriate size. But I'm sure that suggestion can be shot down for some lame excuse also. Here you go, farm out the work to someone who can.

PS: Apparently somebody has enough time to copy prints on a scanner that is too small. Merging segments of scanned images from scanners is easy with some experience. The experience will come with time.

:munch:

LOL i have been merging segments on scanned images for 10+ years
there can be tonal variations that don't look right, no matter how much experience
one may have ...

 

[Vincent Brady]

I used to scan negs and prints, but over time I have come to feel that scanning the print is the most honest representation of my work and darkroom ability. I have even learned how to scan my 12 x16 prints in 2 halves and join them together (in order to show my older work). Nowadays I'm inclined to make an 8x10 print of my new work in order to show it.

Cheers
Vincent

 

[Ian David]

I used to scan negs and prints, but over time I have come to feel that scanning the print is the most honest representation of my work and darkroom ability.

That's nice. However, if someone is posting a neg scan and stating that it is a neg scan, they are obviously not trying to represent their darkroom printing ability. They are showing their compositional choices, their cropping choices, their feeling for the appropriate contrast, the effect of the film and developer combo, where they went on the weekend with their film camera, etc, etc. I cannot see how a neg scan is in any way a dishonest representation of any of these things. (It might be if you start seriously manipulating the image, but you can do that with a print scan too if you are that kind of person.)

Viewing the APUG gallery as a vehicle for only finished paper products unnecessarily limits its usefulness, and gives us all fewer interesting photos to look at.

Ian

 

[MaximusM3]

That's nice. However, if someone is posting a neg scan and stating that it is a neg scan, they are obviously not trying to represent their darkroom printing ability. They are showing their compositional choices, their cropping choices, their feeling for the appropriate contrast, the effect of the film and developer combo, where they went on the weekend with their film camera, etc, etc. I cannot see how a neg scan is in any way a dishonest representation of any of these things. (It might be if you start seriously manipulating the image, but you can do that with a print scan too if you are that kind of person.)

Viewing the APUG gallery as a vehicle for only finished paper products unnecessarily limits its usefulness, and gives us all fewer interesting photos to look at.

Ian

Ian,

I may add that manipulating a print is pretty much the norm, as it is a negative. One would be hard pressed to find a successful print which required no work in the darkroom. The tools are different but the intent is the same.

Max

 

[Daud]

Good post - you never beat around the bush!

David.
http://davidalockwood.wordpress.com

 

[Mike Té]

I read through this whole thread and, though I might have missed it, no-one mentionned the existing guidelines about uploading photos.

From the "Upload Image" window under "Gallery":

"Please refrain from posting any images that have been manipulated digitally such as converting color images to black and white, photoshop filtering tricks, etc. Also no multi-media/mixed media hybrid images or hybrid images in general, this includes digitally enlarged negatives which are then contact printed (see our sister site hybridphoto.com if you are interested in sharing such work). All images posted should be a representation of 100% traditional work, typically negative scans or print scans produced from a 100% traditional workflow.

The uploaded image should be the best representation of the actual final print and nothing more. We still accept neg scans in the galleries. We accept that some adjustment of contrast, brightness and sharpness may be needed to match the physical print and, for negative scans, to approximate a straight print.

Failure to follow the above rules will result in deletion of your image. Please respect the spirit of this community and our desire to share scans of 100% traditional based work in the galleries. If you understand the above rules then continue below. Thank You."

I would think that the encouragement to show a negative scan as purely as possible, with no digital manipulation, is pretty clear. I'm not saying that you must agree with that; it's obvious that not everyone does.

My personal opinion is that the above rules are a good attempt to honour the spirit and intent of the ANALOG Photography Users Group within the context of a web-based medium and considering the potential slippery slope that digital manipulation represents within that context.

 

[Mike Té]

Another thing; I don't think that this is an ethical question, rather a simple group agreement to stick to analog. Gentlemen's agreement, ladie's agreement, honour system whatever you'd like to call it. The only problem with that kind of system is that, when someone drifts outside the bounds of the agreement, gentlemen and ladies have to call them on it, which will inevitably (almost always) ruffle feathers.