What is a better term than "Hybrid Darkroom?"

[Alan Klein]

I enjoying shooting film and watching this forum. However, I don't have the room to develop or print analog. It would be nice if there was a separate section called Digital Printing and Scanning. Those who are 100% analog don't have to go there. Yet, it would be helpful to the many who like me want to discuss this way of processing as well. Why would anyone be offended? We're all shooting with film. How would that take away from discussions on APUG?

 

[Sirius Glass]

: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?

The numbers that you pull out of who knows where are baseless and undoubtedly absurdly low.

That does not make you a bad person, just someone who just wants to stir the pot.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I don't think anyone is expressing any disdain for hybrid methods. It's just not the purpose of this website.
I agree, "hybrid workflow" is about the best it's gonna get. It allows for movement in both directions, too.

Look over the knee jerk response of some and it's obvious there is a lot of hatred for the hybrid workflow.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Paul Verizzo:

there is a hybrid "group" ( tab next to forum at the top of the page )
you can ask hybrid workflow questions there.
===


hi palewin

not sure if you saw this
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Yeah, but it seems dead.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I enjoying shooting film and watching this forum. However, I don't have the room to develop or print analog. It would be nice if there was a separate section called Digital Printing and Scanning. Those who are 100% analog don't have to go there. Yet, it would be helpful to the many who like me want to discuss this way of processing as well. Why would anyone be offended? We're all shooting with film. How would that take away from discussions on APUG?

Hello! Amen!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Look over the knee jerk response of some and it's obvious there is a lot of hatred for the hybrid workflow.

Not a hatred for hybrid workflow, but a hatred built up in the past for good reasons for needless and spiteful attacks on the ground rules for this website. If that really bothers one, then one should just move on to photo.net and not crap in APUG's, HybridPhoto's and DPUG's bed and then complain about the sheets being dirty and stained.

 

[eddie]

Look over the knee jerk response of some and it's obvious there is a lot of hatred for the hybrid workflow.

The problem is with people trying to change the site's charter. It's not hatred. It's that it doesn't belong here. And, the decision regarding the site's purpose is regularly being challenged by people who have no right to do so.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Look over the knee jerk response of some and it's obvious there is a lot of hatred for the hybrid workflow.

Correction. There is a lot of dislike for the discussion on APUG (in violation of the chosen focus of this site since its inception) of the digital hybrid photographic workflow. The workflow itself is fine. Use it as you wish and see fit. I'm actually doing more 6x6 Provia scanning myself later on tonight.

Are you in difficulty with the concept that it's not the thing that is the problem, but rather the discussion of the thing? I ask because you appear to continue confusing the two.

Is there some way in which I can be of greater assistance in helping you to overcome that difficulty?

Ken

 

[rpsawin]

Multi-option processing facility.


Best regards,

Bob
CEO CFO EIEIO, Ret.

 

[ozphoto]

No purity involved - just focus here on APUG.

I frequently converse with people about digital topics, just not here on APUG.

I infrequently use a digital camera, but I don't talk about it here on APUG.

I have three scanners, two of which can scan film, and two of which can scan prints, but I don't ask questions about them here on APUG.

I'm happy to learn about digital negatives, ink sets (sort of), complex sets of printer instructions (sort of), a bit about the manipulations available using software (a very little bit), printers that print digitally on to light sensitive photographic paper (a lot), scanners and a few other similar things, just not here on APUG.

With great trepidation, I would say that if you want to discuss all these things on APUG:

1) those discussions are not wanted here on APUG; and
2) if you insist on it, you are not welcome here on APUG.

It is not about the subjects themselves, it is about the characteristics of this forum.

Since this forum was started, over 75,000 have signed on as members, and they have, collectively, posted more than 1,650,000 different posts. As I type, nearly 900 are on line.

Maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with that "purity" you so decry.

I have to agree with everything you said here, Matt - there's a time and place for discussing many things, and in the case of APUG that doesn't include the digital components of photography.

As someone else mentioned upthread, the decision by Sean to integrate DPUG to seamlessly swap between the 2 forums, will probably assist greatly; I'm interested in the scanning and printing components of digital, but DPUG is so quiet (and I actually forget to check these days), that I rarely visit.

To me, APUG is all things "traditional" - film, paper, chemicals, darkroom. I can happily spend hours in my darkroom, but to do the same in front of a monitor - forget it!

Due to my current geographic location, I actually have to use a "hybrid process" - scans of my film allow me to print at the local lab. I *hate* having to do it, but unfortunately setting up another darkroom, will cost more than my original setup and is also highly impractical.

For the time being, it's a "hybrid process" here at home, with the "analog/traditional" process being very,very welcome when I venture back to AU every 18 months.

 

[Jerevan]

Paul,

I am sorry to say - you are in all honesty just fishing for troll bait. You read the rules and can't abide by them.

And if DPUG is so "dead" - then go start a fire there instead and get things moving.

Apart from this, I totally agree with Matt in his post above.

 

[Nige]

Let me try a question from a different angle. Let's assume that you are a hybrid workflow photographer. You can come to APUG's B&W Film, Paper & Chemistry forum for all the information you want on film processing, which is wonderful. But now you want to scan your film and print it on an inkjet printer. Where do you go?.

try Google.... there's only about a million* websites that cater for such questions...

* - only a slight exageration

 

[rbultman]

If everyone that has complained about the lack of hybrid discussion here, myself included, would start posting on DPUG, that site would get critical mass.

It's clear that all people who keep asking the same question about hybrid support here and expecting a different answer are crazy, myself included, to paraphrase A. Einstein.

Respect the charter. Post non-analog stuff on DPUG.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[pdeeh]

It's clear that all people who keep asking the same question about hybrid support here and expecting a different answer are crazy, myself included, to paraphrase A. Einstein.

Respect the charter. Post non-analog stuff on DPUG.

I think this is right.

APUG has a decided position set by the owner, and I'm happy to abide by that.

What always does bother me in these threads is the tone of moral hysteria adopted by some posters who seem to think that a question about scanning (or digital negatives or whatever) presages the End of Days and requires the excoriation of the questioner.

There's no reason for the members not to debate this sort of thing from time to time, and there's no reason not to do so in a respectful way.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

I think this is right.

APUG has a decided position set by the owner, and I'm happy to abide by that.

What always does bother me in these threads is the tone of moral hysteria adopted by some posters who seem to think that a question about scanning (or digital negatives or whatever) presages the End of Days and requires the excoriation of the questioner.

There's no reason for the members not to debate this sort of thing from time to time, and there's no reason not to do so in a respectful way.

Well said.

FWIW, my posting was not intended to be a troll. I've been on and off this forum for six years and I doubt if my postings have been intended to inflame passions.

As to the alleged many forums out there that would be a home to this work flow, there are no forums out there that I've come across that deal with film like this one does. There are so many true experts here. (And, as noted above, many confess to the, um, new work flow.)

 

[RobC]

This is a web forum and NOT a democracy.

 

[rbultman]

...there are no forums out there that I've come across that deal with film like this one does.

I think that's pretty much the source of the frustration in a nutshell. The scope of expertise here regarding chemical photography is quite broad and the dearth of traffic elsewhere can be maddening. It would be much more useful to hybrid users if there was a way to bridge between hybrid and traditional users in order to gain from the collected knowledge here. But, that is not the charter of this site and we should respect that.

Still, take and contribute what you can from this site while abiding by the charter, and visit and contribute to DPUG when you can't.



Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[removed account4]

Yeah, but it seems dead.

the best way to make it alove again is to post questions there
same with DPUG ..
the signal to noise ratio is very different there
as tkamiya said its all business ..
and in a short time DPUG and APUG will be
piped better so you can log into apug switch on DPUG
and ask your question without leaving APUG...
as if it was the "grey area" ...
if you have hybrid workflow questions folks on DPUG know their stuff
i'd suggest you give it a try there because while it has been noted
a lot of people here might be involved with that sort of thing/s
its just not spoken here. i am sure if you KNOW someone here
you can ask him or her questions via PM and they will answer them, but not in
the forum ... its kind of like if this was a classic vw forum
and someone with a vr6 gti started asking questions about removing the intake manifold, while i am sure
some of the folks woudln't mind answering the questions, they probably have
the same car and are just as enthusiastic about it as their notchback, they just do that chat off-public radar.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I am quite interested to see how this change Sean is making will pan out.

 

[removedacct1]

DPUG is not a viable source of information for the digital printer. So where is one supposed to look? (Incidentally, the APUG Enlarging forum is pretty inactive as well, making me wonder where people are going with questions on darkroom printing too.)

In my case this isn't critical, since I have something like 45 years of darkroom experience, and still get most of my info from the LFPF which is less restrictive than APUG in terms of process. But it seems to me that in some ways the APUG requirement to remain analog at every stage from image capture through image output leaves many film-based photographers hanging in mid-air, unless there is another forum to fill the gap.

I have probably spent more time in a darkroom than 90% of APUG members ever will (not saying anything here other than stating a fact). In the 1980s through 1998 I spend thousands of hours in darkrooms, printing my own work and work for other artists. But now, I no longer care to endure any more exposure to that chemistry. Because my work flow leaves the territory of "film and chemicals" once I have processed negatives in my hands, APUG can only address some of my needs and processes. I wouldn't mind that if it weren't for the fact that the attitude coming from some of the "purist faction" at APUG makes me feel dismissed and disparaged for my choices. I find that objectionable, since I know the value of my skill set and I earned every bit of it. Its a shame that isn't respected as I believe it should be.

For me, this makes APUG an environment I can only plug into halfway, since I am a second class citizen here. So be it. I'll participate when and where its reasonable for me to do so and leave the rest out of the discussion.

 

[removedacct1]

Respect the charter. Post non-analog stuff on DPUG.

I wonder, will DPUG show the same intolerance for "film talk" as APUG shows for digital processes here? Can I expect to encounter "take your discussion of film and darkroom over there - its not welcome here" ?

 

[pdeeh]

I'd bet it won't, in fact it wouldn't surprise me if more and more wet process discussions migrate there as the apug hybrid users find it easier to access both sites.
It might leave a small rump of fundamentalists here ...

That's just a wondering on my part, not a prediction, and time will tell of course

 

[Bob Carnie]

For me, this makes APUG an environment I can only plug into halfway...... Paul above.


I feel the same way Paul does...

As a darkroom worker now actively each working week since 1973 I feel I have a lot to offer to this community , this community I like btw and will continue to support whatever way it goes.

But since 2001 much has changed that does indeed include advanced methods of making silver and pt pd , cyanotype and many alternative prints we all admire. Most of these changes are in the way a negative
is prepared. I still work exactly the same way in the darkroom, and like Paul I have made lots of prints, and I have built my whole life around my wet darkroom.

When I first joined APUG - digital capture and the equipment needed to scan and produce negatives was either not of high enough quality or it was too expensive to get on the ground floor.
Today that is not the case both equipment and costs are of high quality and in line.. The work being done behind this HYBRID curtain is actually cutting edge and the goal of most of the workers
I know involved with this is of the very highest quality.. Not your average bathroom darkroom variety but real world gallery and museum shows.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

FWIW, my posting was not intended to be a troll. I've been on and off this forum for six years and I doubt if my postings have been intended to inflame passions.

Not buying it. Let's see...

You started off your original post by painting a picture of the APUG membership as a hysterical mob screaming "Heretic!", "Blasphemy!" and "Burn him on a stake!" whenever anyone asks them a digital hybrid-related question.

You followed that up by then describing anyone on APUG who may object to the inclusion of digital topics of discussion in a designed all-analog forum as being the "Purity Police", and being the potential cause for the eventual extinction of the entire medium of film itself. An outburst prompted I suppose because you felt you weren't getting your way.

You continued by then pontificating that "Times have changed" and characterized us all as "Luddites", presumably for not see The Light in the same way you have been blessed to see it. From a professional point of view this one always makes me giggle.

Then you go on to label the APUG membership as followers of a religious cult practicing "Deification of films...", then question our collective evolutionary past, and finally accuse us further of engaging in "dismissal of anyone not toeing the church dogma." (Interestingly from a persecution complex viewpoint, the second poster in this thread to falsely claim that.)

So exactly how is this not trolling behavior? Is this really how your mom taught you to ask strangers for help? She told you to first insult the crap out of them, then pose your request for assistance? That you will stand a better chance of receiving a useful response that way?

Not buying it. And I suspect neither would she...

Ken

 

[removedacct1]

The work being done behind this HYBRID curtain is actually cutting edge and the goal of most of the workers
I know involved with this is of the very highest quality.. Not your average bathroom darkroom variety but real world gallery and museum shows.

If someone opts to ignore (or worse still, dismiss as irrelevant) that message, they do so at their own creative peril, IMO.