Smashed the Plustek with a hammer

[MattKing]

I will, however, support converting just about any old scanner to a lamp, and selling it on Etsy.

 

[markjwyatt]

I will, however, support converting just about any old scanner to a lamp, and selling it on Etsy.

Could make nice seed starter planter, complete with light.

 

[mshchem]

Manuel
Que?

May not be suitable for some workplaces!
Andrew Sachs, who played Manuel, passed away in 2016.

So sweet. What a great cast. Basil is just about ready to explode most of the time. I see Cleese every so often on late night Stephen Colbert. Couldn't make alot of these shows today. Python went over the line in many shows, still they were making fun of themselves behaving badly. FAWLTY TOWERS was so funny. My late mother and father would laugh to tears.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...A photograph is a print. Anything else is a faux-tograph...

That's an opinion, not a fact. We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. Any observable image, recorded through a lens by any sensor (film, darkroom paper, digital, etc.) is a photograph. Reality of language is. No matter how much some would prefer things be different.

OP: Why is this thread in the "Darkroom Equipment" category and not the "Scanning and Scanners" category where it belongs?

 

[NB23]

Of course it’s an opinion.

lol.

That's an opinion, not a fact. We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. Any observable image, recorded through a lens by any sensor (film, darkroom paper, digital, etc.) is a photograph. Reality of language is. No matter how much some would prefer things be different.

OP: Why is this thread in the "Darkroom Equipment" category and not the "Scanning and Scanners" category where it belongs?

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Of course it’s an opinion.

lol.

What do you find funny about that? You stated your opinion in a very matter-of-fact, anti-digital way. There's a lot of that going on here at PHOTRIO. Doing it serves neither film-loving nor digital-exclusive nor hybrid photographers (nor those who fall into multiple categories) well at all.

This "analog is the only true photography" nonsense is counter-productive for anyone who hopes to promote silver-halide imaging. It makes those who try promulgating the "superiority" of "their way" seem elitist and off-putting. In my opinion, the "analog purity" crowd ought reconsider its approach.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

At some point tonight, I was scanning negatives and realized the freaking Plustek scanner was adding random horizontal white lines in my negatives that were not deserved. At first I thought they were "scratches" and then I realized, scratches in the negatives would have been black, not white. Then I realized my shitty plustek scanner was biting the dust.
I enjoyed taking the scanner out to my driveway and smashing it to bits with a hammer. Now if I want to show you my negatives, I'll need to actually print in my darkroom and then scan a proof sheet. I hate scanners. Always have, always will. Digits have nothing to do with real photography. By the way. a cheap and shitty plustek scanner is almost a zero in my monthly income.

It feels really good do smash digits into bits and then smash the mechanisms that make digits. That Plustek is still sitting in my driveway (in bits) as I speak. Oh boy, do I feel good about this. How about you?

Why is this thread in the "Darkroom Equipment" category and not the "Scanning and Scanners" category where it belongs?

 

[Vaughn]

Probably because some people see the world differently than you do and realize that facts are often just opinions in disguise.

The thread is about returning to the darkroom and its equipment.

 

[lecarp]

That's an opinion, not a fact. We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. Any observable image, recorded through a lens by any sensor (film, darkroom paper, digital, etc.) is a photograph. Reality of language is. No matter how much some would prefer things be different.

And yet you choose to respond with another opinion. Possibly a bit of fiction as well.

 

[Craig75]

What do you find funny about that? You stated your opinion in a very matter-of-fact, anti-digital way. There's a lot of that going on here at PHOTRIO. Doing it serves neither film-loving nor digital-exclusive nor hybrid photographers (nor those who fall into multiple categories) well at all.

This "analog is the only true photography" nonsense is counter-productive for anyone who hopes to promote silver-halide imaging. It makes those who try promulgating the "superiority" of "their way" seem elitist and off-putting. In my opinion, the "analog purity" crowd ought reconsider its approach.

it's not even worth biting. This kind of bollocks has kept so many younger people without access to darkrooms or hybrid workers away from this forum - it's a b/s attitude but it's too entrenched here. That's just the way it is - a death sentence of "when they bringing kodachrome back?" and "why does every thing suck past the exact date that i stopped keeping track of new lenses, paper, films, etc etc"

(which has nothing to do with OP as I've often wanted to boot a printer or computer across the room too)

 

[NB23]

Because it was very matter-of-fact to me.

Who am I? I am a dude that has shot over
2 million digital fauxtographs as of today, and I have printed above 12,000 darkroom prints throughout 2020 alone. And I’m not even counting ‘94 to 2019. I guess this is supposed to make me an expert.

You see, some people with 0.01% of my experience call themselves experts, bloggers, testers, influencers... but me, What I do? I call digital photography fauxtography. That is all.

Yes, some people will be offensed by what I wrote above. Why, I have no idea. I’m actually used to it.

What do you find funny about that? You stated your opinion in a very matter-of-fact, anti-digital way. There's a lot of that going on here at PHOTRIO. Doing it serves neither film-loving nor digital-exclusive nor hybrid photographers (nor those who fall into multiple categories) well at all.

This "analog is the only true photography" nonsense is counter-productive for anyone who hopes to promote silver-halide imaging. It makes those who try promulgating the "superiority" of "their way" seem elitist and off-putting. In my opinion, the "analog purity" crowd ought reconsider its approach.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

And yet you choose to respond with another opinion. Possibly a bit of fiction as well.

Nope. Fact.

I'm pushing 70 years old. I've been photographing since I was 12, developing and printing my own film in a darkroom since one year after that. I own and use film cameras from 35mm to 11x14, still, today. I also own full frame digital cameras, edit the raw files they produce, and make inkjet prints from the finished files. All the final products, from both workflows, are photographs. Anyone who denies that, claiming that only the silver halide prints are photographs, is an elitist snob. I impute several motivations for that attitude. Some may be amateurs seeking membership in an exclusive "club." Others might sell their work and try to distinguish themselves from others attempting earning a living as a photographer. Then there are just plain trolls.

Why is this thread in the "Darkroom Equipment" category and not the "Scanning and Scanners" category where it belongs?

...The thread is about returning to the darkroom and its equipment.

No, it's not. That might be the OP's reaction to the real thread topic. A defective scanner that he smashed with a hammer.

What do you find funny about that? You stated your opinion in a very matter-of-fact, anti-digital way...

Because it was very matter-of-fact to me...I have printed above 12,000 darkroom prints throughout 2020 alone. And I’m not even counting ‘94 to 2019. I guess this is supposed to make me an expert...What I do? I call digital photography fauxtography...

You seem to fall into a category of professionals seeking to make your darkroom skills appear rare and valuable. This is not uncommon, since digital has made the production of prints that appear as good as, and in many cases even better than silver halide prints, substantially easier.

The reality today is that one, and only one, thing makes silver halide photography superior to digital photography. Life expectancy of the prints. Reality sucks, but it's real.

 

[NB23]

I “seem to...”
What a load of bs. Sorry.

You seem to love playing police and try to make people fit into your tiny box.

 

[grat]

*yawn*

Well, it was a nice thread for awhile. But I believe what we have here is an ex-horse being assaulted.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...What a load of bs...

*yawn*...

When there's nothing substantive to say in response, that's what one gets.

OK, have fun with your little elite "analog" photography club. If John Austin ever explains why he started this thread in the "Darkroom Equipment" category rather than "Scanning and Scanners," there might be a post in it worth reading.

 

[SchwinnParamount]

Probably because some people see the world differently than you do and realize that facts are often just opinions in disguise.

The thread is about returning to the darkroom and its equipment.

exactly

 

[SchwinnParamount]

He is obviously a commie. He got the hammer out because he was sickle of the scanner.

lol

 

[markjwyatt]

...That might be the OP's reaction to the real thread topic. A defective scanner that he smashed with a hammer...

Given that the OP chose to write this thread in the Darkroom Equipment section, and the fact that a scanner is not darkroom equipment, adding the fact that the scanner smashing tale was followed by a story of the OPs return to the darkroom (which seems to fit with the subject matter of the forum), one might conclude that the OP was using the scanner smashing incident as a literary device to represent his journey back to the darkroom. You will probably be critical of what you feel his deep inner intent in dong this was, but it seems that under that circumstance the real thread topic was in fact returning to the darkroom.

 

[MattKing]

Given that the OP chose to write this thread in the Darkroom Equipment section, and the fact that a scanner is not darkroom equipment, adding the fact that the scanner smashing tale was followed by a story of the OPs return to the darkroom (which seems to fit with the subject matter of the forum), one might conclude that the OP was using the scanner smashing incident as a literary device to represent his journey back to the darkroom. You will probably be critical of what you feel his deep inner intent in dong this was, but it seems that under that circumstance the real thread topic was in fact returning to the darkroom.

But wouldn't that mean that the thread belongs in Ethics and Philosophy, rather than Darkroom Equipment?
Unless you are arguing that the hammer constitutes Darkroom Equipment.

 

[Saganich]

[QUOTE="Sometimes it's hard to look at the TV at home, much less sit in front of the computer and force myself to look at images.[/QUOTE]

Same. Unfortunately for me to print means I have to travel an hour to my darkroom. So I scan everything and edit very quickly with my less than basic photoshop skills then throw a few up here to see if it's any good. I've been considering hiring a life model just to get some positive feedback around here.

 

[DonW]

Nope. Fact.

I'm pushing 70 years old. I've been photographing since I was 12, developing and printing my own film in a darkroom since one year after that. I own and use film cameras from 35mm to 11x14, still, today. I also own full frame digital cameras, edit the raw files they produce, and make inkjet prints from the finished files. All the final products, from both workflows, are photographs. Anyone who denies that, claiming that only the silver halide prints are photographs, is an elitist snob. I impute several motivations for that attitude. Some may be amateurs seeking membership in an exclusive "club." Others might sell their work and try to distinguish themselves from others attempting earning a living as a photographer. Then there are just plain trolls.No, it's not. That might be the OP's reaction to the real thread topic. A defective scanner that he smashed with a hammer.
You seem to fall into a category of professionals seeking to make your darkroom skills appear rare and valuable. This is not uncommon, since digital has made the production of prints that appear as good as, and in many cases even better than silver halide prints, substantially easier.

The reality today is that one, and only one, thing makes silver halide photography superior to digital photography. Life expectancy of the prints. Reality sucks, but it's real.

I agree with Sal 100%. We are of a similar age and I with many years as a professional photographer and custom darkroom printer.

I enjoy both workflows now that I am retired. Today it's about creating art and/or just having fun.

 

[Vaughn]

But wouldn't that mean that the thread belongs in Ethics and Philosophy, rather than Darkroom Equipment?
Unless you are arguing that the hammer constitutes Darkroom Equipment.

No...but we might consider Photrio establishing a thread with a psychological bend to it.

 

[lecarp]

No...but we might consider Photrio establishing a thread with a psychological bend to it.

NICE!

 

[mshchem]

I think it was an act of God
"And the unclean spirits came out and entered the scanner; and the herd, numbering about two thousand, rushed down the steep bank into the sea and drowned in the sea.”

It's a biblical truth!

I smashed a little POS 300 dollar ultralight computer. I wanted to kill any chance of someone getting at my files. I found a vintage 20 ounce Craftsman ball peen hammer to be perfect for "driving out the unclean spirits!"

 

[markjwyatt]

But wouldn't that mean that the thread belongs in Ethics and Philosophy, rather than Darkroom Equipment?
Unless you are arguing that the hammer constitutes Darkroom Equipment.

Darkrooms are full of darkroom equipment, and a scanner is a piece of photographic equipment, so sets the context for "equipment" and "darkroom". If the emphasis was the OP's attitude re: digital vs. analog, then philosophy may make more sense, but since the OP was not explicit in that, and rather that aspect was desconstructed from his statements and thrown at him, I think this is a valid forum certainly based on OP intent.