TheFlyingCamera
Membership Council
I think it's like wearing a ball cap backwards, or pants so low your boxer shorts are showing, and you're belting them around your thighs to avoid getting in legal trouble - fashion statement, you know?
In the last few years Ive noticed quite a few people using a DSLR with the lens hood back to front on the end of the lens. Perhaps all the DSLR users Ive seen doing this are doing it intentionally. But this does seem a shame, when it would only take a few seconds to reverse it.
In a classic installment of I Love Lucy, Ricky gets so angry with Lucy that he mutilates the expressions cheap skate and tight wad. Which brings me to the reason for this post.
I really can't understand how people can risk their photographs by cutting corners. Usually it is not a matter of cost but a warped mindset that they have beaten the system. It can be trying to get that 37th exposure or dilution of developer or fixer beyond the manufacturers recommendations or using old and very fogged film. There are many other examples. Quite frankly I can't understand how they justify their actions. There is a difference in being frugal and being cheap.
I get especially annoyed by those at APUG who swear that it is good to save money by using dish washing liquid instead of PhotoFlo and by using Borax instead of the chemicals supplied by photographic companies. Not only are they hurting the people that do not know better, but they are also reducing the market for companies like Kodak and Ilford.
One cost more than even mentioning.....the other, well, I keep its price tag on the back to remind me......
I have a very different take on this. If you are a beginner, start with good quality, fresh stuff......brand name SLR, 50mm lens, fresh Kodak/Ilford/Fuji film, Ilford MGIV paper, and fresh chemistry for every session with stock within date. If you do that while learning, the quality is all about you. This stuff all works and the quality control is perfect. There is no second guessing. After you learn, you can do whatever you want. Crappy cameras, old chemistry, etc can be part of the creative process if you know how it all works. Personally, I only use material and equipment I know well (crap or otherwise). I prefer to be creative with the stuff I can control than random chance. Random chance more often gives me crap than art!
I hardly think using 20 mule team equates with using exhausted solutions or outdated color materials. I'm sure people have experienced a wide range of results from the latter, from good-as-new to entirely unacceptable. The drawbacks of Borax AFAIK are entirely "theoretical"-many people including myself have used it for years or decades without any trouble, and the reports of less than adequate performance are few, if any.I get especially annoyed by those at APUG who swear that it is good to save money by using dish washing liquid instead of PhotoFlo and by using Borax instead of the chemicals supplied by photographic companies. Not only are they hurting the people that do not know better, but they are also reducing the market for companies like Kodak and Ilford.
from what i understand borax can be replace sodium metaborate in some formulas even though it is sodium tetaborate
( in d-23 for example ) and i think ( correct me if i am wrong ) the film developing cookbook says this ..
But doesn't Palmolive soften your hands while you do your film?
I'd heard the dish-soap thing before from someone working in a photo store. He told me only use it in a "pinch" (if you really really have to and can't get the correct stuff), and that with proper technique surfactant probably isn't even needed.
jnanian, you are missing the point that I have been making. If I were to recommend Clorox bleach replace the bleach for C-41 processing, would you have worked so hard to get around the point?
The pH produced by sodium tetraborate (borax) and sodium metaborate (Kodalk) are quite different and one cannot be substituted for the other. Borax is a mild alkali while sodium metaborate is almost a alkaline as sodium carbonate. If the FDC says that they are interchangeable then this is another error in a poorly edited book. Borate chemistry is rather complex and the naming can be quite confusing.
Years ago I contacted US Borax about the purity of Twenty Mule Team borax. It is more than pure enough for photo purposes. The principle impurity is a very small amount of sodium chloride.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?