What is a better term than "Hybrid Darkroom?"

[Bob Carnie]

PE - what year was the LVT recorder introduced to the market? I believe it was around 1989 or so but I do know Ron has the answer.

All the big commercial labs worldwide back then used them to make composite images on film for printing purposes from museum shows to home decor. It was
a major breakthrough , then came the premier system and then the Lambdas, the rest is history.


Currently Salgado is using a LVT recorder to make negatives that he can put in an enlarger and use silver paper..He switched to a digital camera capture system when
he started Genesis Project, but makes still makes wet silver prints.



Ya Hybrid that sounds cool lets go with that.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

In fact, I don't like the "analog" vs "digital", and prefer "chemical" vs "electronic", because it is a much more accurate representation of reality.

So enlarger light sources are powered using what? Candles?

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I find hybrid work flow to be an accurate description.

 

[Bob Carnie]

To the OP question - I print with both all digital and all analoque methods as well a combination of both.

When I am referring to my silver enlarging work stations and room its the DARKROOM.
When I am referring to the pt pd and tri colour gum workstatations its the DIMROOM.
And when I am printing inkjet well its in the OPENROOM
When I am preparing for printing or any job its in the MONITOR ROOM.


All are humidity controlled and temp controlled, All have their specific space, equipment and needs, We do not use the same
buckets , stirsticks , measuring devices, trays and washing stations for both so they are always being separated and kept
in specific places.
Its funny how pt pd and gum overs have changed the workflow and needs for my facility.


so yes over time we have came up with fancy names here for where we are working and setting up jobs.

 

[removedacct1]

great! Get these ixel peepers out of here

So, the takeaway message here is "lets evict anyone who isn't strictly Old School Darkroom from start to finish"??

 

[palewin]

Since I spend far more time over on the Large Format Photography Forum, I guess I missed the "hybrid wars" on APUG. I definitely think that using a 4x5 view camera with sheet film, and tray developing the film in a darkroom qualifies as "analog photography." How one prints the resulting negatives seems to me to be a separate issue, because the "hybrid workflow" process is neither entirely analog (APUG) nor entirely digital (DPUG). Do we really need a separate "analog capture user's group?"

That said, I'm even more in-between, because I make my "good prints" in the darkroom the old-fashioned way, but I use my Epson 4990 scanner to make proof sheets, to allow me to post images to the web, and sometimes to make work prints, when I want to see what something looks like as an 8x10, and to get a sense in advance of what dodging, burning, and contrast controls I might need when making the 11x14 chemical print. Talk about a hybrid process!

 

[ic-racer]

. We have to electronically convert things to get them up here for people to see.

Actually not. The only way to see prints is at a gallery, museum or local gathering of like-minded photographers. Prints cannot be physically uploaded. They can only be seen in person.

 

[RobC]

If all you've got to worry about is what you are going to call your "process" then I'd suggest maybe you're looking for a marketing term like giclee to make what you do sound more palletable. How about "artificial intelligence print".

Interestingly, if you look in the theasaurus for digital you will find that a given synonym for it is analog and vica versa. Go figure...

 

[Alan Johnson]

Empty room comes to mind, as I write DPUG only has one thread in todays posts.
I respect that it should be kept separate from here but if it had a page of the last say 20 threads posted it would be more worth visiting.

 

[Bill Burk]

You might use the term Film Capture.

Any talk about that step in the workflow is OK here.

 

[RobC]

or maybe "analclone"

 

[Truzi]

Since I don't have a darkroom, my "process" takes place in the bathroom... could I describe that as an hybrid darkroom? Doing so might make me sound like one of the cool kids.
My best friend and I like to go to Hocking Hills, Ohio, and rent a (different) cabin for a week every summer. In one cabin, the only bedroom had the only toilet and shower; right next to the bed - not at all separate or private. We referred to it as the "multipurpose room."

Personally, the only thing that really bugs me about "hybrid" anything is that it has become a popular buzzword anymore. Otherwise, I think the word is fine for descriptive use.

I prefer "hybrid work-flow." To me, "hybrid darkroom" suggests the "hybrid" part takes place in the darkroom. If it does, fine, otherwise it's just a darkroom.

 

[Photo Engineer]

You just can't letgo of film and this allows you to claim still be using film.You are a digital user in hiding!.Come clean

Ralph, I do every method known to produce my images. Some are good and some are bad. Some I like and some I don't.

In the final analysis though, to post an image here or anywhere, you NEED a digital step.

So, we are all guilty!

PE

 

[RobC]

lets dumb it all down and make it all totally generic and call it "Multi Media" so we don't have to exercise our brains in making the distinction

 

[MattKing]

If all you've got to worry about is what you are going to call your "process" then I'd suggest maybe you're looking for a marketing term like giclee to make what you do sound more palletable. How about "artificial intelligence print".

Interestingly, if you look in the theasaurus for digital you will find that a given synonym for it is analog and vica versa. Go figure...

I expect that the thesaurus has analog listed as an antonym for digital.

Actually, we could consider renaming APUG as the "Antonym Photography User Group"; if you think that might help.

In my Darkroom Group, we tend to switch effortlessly between analogue and digital oriented discussions. That works well, most likely because of the fact that we all understand and appreciate that the analogue stuff is the reason for being for the group, and we all have a tremendous amount of respect for the analogue processes. The group would probably dissolve if that weren't the case.

In a much larger community like APUG, where anyone can join without any vetting or discussion of purposes, more restrictive rules are necessary in order to protect APUG from wandering away from its purposes.

i'm all for strengthening DPUG, and making it easier to move back and forth between APUG and DPUG, but not at the cost of diluting APUG.

I do think though that HYBRIDPHOTO was a better name for DPUG.

 

[eddie]

or maybe "analclone"

How about analretention?

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

So, the takeaway message here is "lets evict anyone who isn't strictly Old School Darkroom from start to finish"??

No, the takeaway message here is that because...

"APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes."

...then let's respect the wishes of the larger community by demonstrating our self-discipline and voluntarily limiting the scope of our discussions to those boundaries established by the site charter from which the above quote is taken. Nobody—except you—said anything about member eviction. Only about member topics of discussion.

Both you and I knew the size of the topic envelope when we signed up. Both you and I routinely exceed the scope of that envelope by utilizing hybrid digital photographic methods. I was up last night until 2:00am scanning 6x6 Provia 100F transparencies for online sharing.

Why is it then that I find it so easy to exercise the small amount self-discipline necessary to respect the APUG community by not discussing my use of those off-topic methods, and you fight so hard against it?

Alan Johnson posted a bit earlier that unfortunately there is only one thread in today's DPUG posts. What say you go start another one over there on this same topic? And then post a redirect message here pointing to that new on-topic thread?

That would be the more respectful action to take, as opposed to falsely speculating that we wish to evict you.

Things in life rarely get better all by themselves. Sometimes one must step up, be proactive, and be the change they wish to see.

Ken

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hybrid is the only way I have to print. I have come to hate it, but that's the way it is, so I tolerate it. As a programmer, I have been chained to a keyboard and mouse for 30+ years, and digital printing of analogue photography is my only outlet. In fact, I don't like the "analog" vs "digital", and prefer "chemical" vs "electronic", because it is a much more accurate representation of reality.

I can't wait for the day when I can print my own fully chemically-derived photographs in my own basement darkroom.

Not everyone here has the ability or luxury to process film.
Not everyone here has the ability or luxury to process print chemically.
I get it and respect that.
I started down the hybrid path with every intention of staying committed to it, but between the high usage and high cost of ink coupled with the low quality of the final print I found that I could afford the monetary cost and more importantly the living space cost of setting up a color and black & white darkroom. I do not expect others to follow, however after the endless bashing for continuing using analog techniques I experienced on every other photographic forums started leaking over to APUG, APUG chose to set up a websites and the policy to send digital hybrid technique discussions to HybridPhoto and DPUG.
There are constant complaints about the APUG restrictions and yet those complaining cannot make the effort to put their ideas and thought on HybridPhoto or DPUG. If the complainers would use those sites for hybrid processes, then the critical mass needed to sustain those websites would be there and those sites would succeed.

 

[pschwart]

Ken:
This is obsessive behavior. Rather than skip a thread that includes "hybrid" in the title, you jump in and extend the conversation. We all know the charter. These minor infractions aren't going to corrupt APUG
and are easy to ignore.
Give it a rest, or at least try to be less strident about it.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Were it only a one-off minor infraction your logic would make perfect sense. However, that is not the case. Both of the individuals I addressed (quite civilly I might add, as opposed to stridently) have a long repeat history of the same "minor infraction". The OP even bragged about it in a not-so-subtle (and quite strident) knock against the membership before launching into yet another iteration.

No worries, though. Help is on the way...

Basically this is it. The core systems of APUG & DPUG will be the same, however each site will be it's own unique entity. One user account and profile will work on both sites. Threads can be moved between sites, new posts or searches can search both sites, you have one PM box between sites, etc. APUG will seem no different unless you decide to 'activate' and opt-in to DPUG as well. If you want no part of DPUG then you will not even know it exists. If you opt in, then when you click "new posts" you see everything on both sites, same for gallery, articles etc. This allows us to keep APUG 100% to it's charter and for those who want to dabble in Hybrid/Digital they can opt-in to that. The reverse also applies to DPUG, if a DPUG member wants only DPUG they do not opt-in to the connection to APUG. This also greatly simplifies my management of both systems (1 database, 1 set of backups, one admin panel and more). If you have further questions just let me know.

Thanks again everyone for the massive show of support!

[Emphasis is mine.]



Ken

 

[nbagno]

Wouldn't surprise me if there were more hybrid photographers on APUG than traditional.

 

[pdeeh]

great! Get these ixel peepers out of here

So, the takeaway message here is "lets evict anyone who isn't strictly Old School Darkroom from start to finish"??

I don't know what he's doing here ... (there was a url link here which no longer exists) :munch:

 

[Bob Carnie]

:munch:I made a comment awhile back that out of the 60,000 plus members here I doubted more than 1000 have ever made a traditional print using an enlarger... I take back that estimate, I now estimate there are less than 500.

does this make me a bad person to point this out?

Wouldn't surprise me if there were more hybrid photographers on APUG than traditional.

 

[eddie]

:munch:I made a comment awhile back that out of the 60,000 plus members here I doubted more than 1000 have ever made a traditional print using an enlarger... I take back that estimate, I now estimate there are less than 500.

I think some of the hybridites are due to circumstances (no darkroom space, etc.) but many would use a darkroom, if they could.
I think it would make an interesting poll.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Wouldn't surprise me if there were more hybrid photographers on APUG than traditional.

Without a doubt. And I'm one of them, albeit mostly for online transparency sharing and APUG gallery uploads. This is 2015, after all.

The issue here is not and has never been one of appropriateness of purpose. It's one of appropriateness of discussion topic. And the occasional one-off transgression has never been a problem. It's the with-malice-aforethought serial transgressors that are the problem.

But again, help is on the way...



Ken