Dear Snapshot....
Thank you... this is absolutely my favourite topic, if I could type as fast as I can talk this would be the longest post in the history of APUG .......... I can't.... so it will have to be brief.
The purpose of photography is to produce an image that means something to you, from a personal or artistic perspective, how you view and value that image is very personal, in many cases the issue is what is actually important to you, the resultant physical print or the actual taking of the photograph and recording of the 'memory'......or its commercial or artistic merit.
So..... is imaging on film and then scanning becoming more prevalent...... yes is the answer, but this is a relatively recent phenomenen ( a fashion ? ) no, its more about people getting used to interacting with images on a computer screen ( d*****l ) and then having systems where you can view those images in some quality... the i pad and other devices which are pretty recent have made that easier to share the imagery.
So.......is wet printing suffering......the answer is no and yes.....
In monochrome the answer is no and in colour printing the answer is yes.... for colour I include inkjet printing which is also in decline. Please note I refer to the hobbyist area of colour photography not the mass Camear phone / facebook / instagram generation.
So if I have any area of expertise ( through exposure to it rather than any natural marketing brilliance ! ) its between the dynamic of black and white and colour.
So from 1960 to 1990 virtually everone who shot a colour film got 36 prints back from the D&P house that processed and printed them...
So KODAK / FUJI and AGFA sold approximately half a square metre of colour paper for every film they sold, which is about 9.5 times the volume of the original film sold.....
In monochrome that was never the case since colour photography came to the fore in the early sixties.
In monochrome, then and now, for the hobbyist, it was typical that you selected the images you wished to print, quite often, but not exclusively from a set of contact prints not a set of of 36 prints.
So, does scanning mean you no longer have to contact print ?, in some cases yes, but if you wish to understand what is 'in' the negative my answer would be no....
So we now come to the $ 60,000 question...
Everyone will correctly state I am biased because I'm involved in the manufacture of monochrome paper..... true....but.
When you take a monochrome photograph ( not I suggest a colour image on slide or neg ) you have completed only half the process, you then take that monochrome negative and you transform it into the finished article by your own skill and interpretation, and production of the image as you wish it to be, you can change using your own skill everything about the image and the way its presented and shown, you produce an image that only YOU can make or replicate, this also goes for many of the alt processes that should be said can include 'some' colour images.
You therefore have a unique and permanent personal memory with a physical presense, the image as you made it, this is not the same as a scanned film image.
This is why the vast majority of 'sold' photo imagery as a collectable is the final print, and in the true collector market is on silver geletin paper and usually baryta and in most cases monochrome.
It is also what to me makes the photographer and photography whole..... whilst professional printers do exist and their skills can transform an image, your image ( and they can ).. it is their interpretation even against a set of guidelines.
The greatest pleasure is to take the photograph and to print it yourself in a darkroom..... and that is why this company has been producing the means to do so since 1879... photography did not kill the painter and the painting, d*****l ( and a scanner ) will not kill film photography and the print.....
Believe me when I say, I have NEVER met a person who did not enjoy making a black and white print in a darkroom, I have met people who found it, and still find it, frustrating and challenging... but how many people say that about taking the photograph in the first place, if it was easy and simple we would all be Ansel Adam's, its not and we are'nt.....
For me, taking a good photograph ( negative ) is satisfying, making a great print is just the best feeling...
And I guess for many of you reading this you may have some of the same feeling as me.....and for those who do not print..... hopefully you may discover the light, or is that the dark...
And the above says everything to me about why I do what I do, and how lucky I am to do it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not think I am underestimating or knocking colour photography or printing, I absolutely love it too, but from a personal perspective the 'wet' print rendering I find less creative and more the technical production of a 'correct' colour print.
Simon : ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
