Why are photographers so "fussy"?

[jtk]

I think that accurately describes the extremes of the continuum, but the majority lie somewhere in between. I evaluate both. Don't you? Do you know any photographer who doesn't?

It appears that very few photographers use film anymore. The minilabs their uncles (et al) relied upon have vanished along with the "camera stores" that operated in their communities in ancient times.

Today most photographers use the technology whose-name-is-forbidden here, and most of those photographers use their phones for most of their photos.

Happily there's Photoshop, which many of us find intuitive.

 

[faberryman]

It appears that very few photographers use film anymore. The minilabs their uncles (et al) relied upon have vanished along with the "camera stores" that operated in their communities in ancient times.

Today most photographers use the technology whose-name-is-forbidden here, and most of those photographers use their phones for most of their photos.

Happily there's Photoshop, which many of us find intuitive.

My response which you quoted was in response to VinceMT comments about how photographers evaluated photographs, not whether the photographs were made with a film camera, a digital camera, or a phone.

 

[Vaughn]

Most photographers that I personally know, understand the technical aspects and mostly concentrated on the composition. I hardly call that fussy.

Agreed.

I'll look at a print and consider how well (or not) the technique and skill of the photographer carries the image.

 

[BMbikerider]

To be overly concerned about being fussy is being fussy.

Yes you are 100% right

 

[VinceInMT]

I suppose that if photographers weren’t so fussy, there would be no need for Photrio.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I suppose that if photographers weren’t so fussy, there would be no need for Photrio.

Finding the correct development time for Kodak P3200 and Ilford Delta 3200 in replenished XTOL with Jobo rotary processing is not being fussy, it is being practical and useful.

 

[Ian Grant]

Finding the correct development time for Kodak P3200 and Ilford Delta 3200 in replenished XTOL with Jobo rotary processing is not being fussy, it is being practical and useful.

It's also sensible, and common sense, and as well that goes for any film and developer combinations. It's honing one's craft, it means you can shoot with confidence knowing you will get the results you wanted.

Ian

 

[faberryman]

The word "fussy" sounds pejorative in this context, implying concern or attention which is excessive or unnecessary. I would instead use the word "exacting", and agree that some photographers are more exacting than others.

 

[MattKing]

My wife accuses me regularly of "futzing". And then she expresses appreciation when I take on a task that requires care and attention to large amounts of detail.
I just smile ruefully.

 

[Sirius Glass]

My wife accuses me regularly of "futzing". And then she expresses appreciation when I take on a task that requires care and attention to large amounts of detail.
I just smile ruefully.

Exactly what does "rueful" look like?

 

[koraks]

Very attractive.

According to the man's wife, no doubt.

 

[MattKing]

Exactly what does "rueful" look like?

It is the expression I often display when on Photrio moderation duty

 

[Sirius Glass]

It is the expression I often display when on Photrio moderation duty

And that looks like ... ?

 

[MattKing]

By the way, I keep going back and forth between this thread and the one where Stephen Benskin and aparat are discussing testing and evaluation methods - and I do a lot of smiling ruefully!

 

[faberryman]

Exactly what does "rueful" look like?

rueful (adjective) - expressing sorrow or regret, especially when in a slightly humorous way.

As to what rueful looks like, you'll have to use your imagination. A Google image search returns a variety of different facial expressions.

 

[John Patrick Garriga]

I prefer Cecilia's version, has far more depth than the original, not sure why anyone would think it's botched.

I guess you could say it's botched as a restoration, not botched as an original piece.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

The word "fussy" sounds pejorative in this context, implying concern or attention which is excessive or unnecessary. I would instead use the word "exacting", and agree that some photographers are more exacting than others.

Both are relevant. An artist fusses over exacting details of framing and composition. A fetishist frets over the tradeoffs of an f/2 lens over an f/2.8 lens. The writer Eudora Welty carried a Rolleicord with her and created a stunning portfolio of images of Mississippi in the 1930s for the WPA. One assumes she did not sweat the technical stuff. But her photography is memorable because she chose memorable subjects, and framed them in a way that reflects care and understanding of her subject within the four corners of the image.

Welty considered her photos "snapshots," not Art. Regardless of label, they show an attention to detail, to the moment when people reveal themselves, in the same way her stories do.

 

[redbandit]

It's also sensible, and common sense, and as well that goes for any film and developer combinations. It's honing one's craft, it means you can shoot with confidence knowing you will get the results you wanted.

Ian

if one is worried about consistent results, one would whip up a fresh batch of developer every time and skip the replenished stuff entirely.

As one person once said, "its easier to make a fresh liter of D-23, develop 4 rolls of 135, and dispose of the used stuff and make a fresh batch then it is to make a liter of d-23, a liter of replinisher, and then do the replenished process"

 

[Sirius Glass]

if one is worried about consistent results, one would whip up a fresh batch of developer every time and skip the replenished stuff entirely.

As one person once said, "its easier to make a fresh liter of D-23, develop 4 rolls of 135, and dispose of the used stuff and make a fresh batch then it is to make a liter of d-23, a liter of replinisher, and then do the replenished process"

No, the whole point of replenished developers is that they are better than the stock developer. Plus what you are proposing as throwing out good chemicals is wasteful, and that in itself is being fussy.

 

[Mr Bill]

if one is worried about consistent results, one would whip up a fresh batch of developer every time and skip the replenished stuff entirely.

A lot of people think that. But... if those who have dealt with "process control" in a decent-sized "proper" lab know that it's exactly backwards.

The consistency in a "proper" replenished system comes mainly from two things. First, the processing tank has enough volume that individual rolls have very little impact on it; doesn't matter if a few rolls are either blank vs heavily overexposed. Second, the slight variation that normally happens in fresh mixes gets "damped out" in a replenished system. The net result is that changes in developer activity, as seen on "process control strips," happens relatively slowly. A "proper" lab will see this happening and make slight adjustments to the replenishment rate to correct for this.

Speaking from years of large lab experience. (I'd might be seen as the king of fussiness if people here could have seen our operation.)

But to your point (I didn't quote it all) about processing only 4 rolls, yeah, I agree that trying to set up replenishment is kinda pointless. In that sort of situation.

 

[foc]

Speaking from years of large lab experience. (I'd might be seen as the king of fussiness if people here could have seen our operation.)

That kind of fussiness is the right kind. It keeps the lab producing consistently good and monitored results.

 

[redbandit]

A lot of people think that. But... if those who have dealt with "process control" in a decent-sized "proper" lab know that it's exactly backwards.

The consistency in a "proper" replenished system comes mainly from two things. First, the processing tank has enough volume that individual rolls have very little impact on it; doesn't matter if a few rolls are either blank vs heavily overexposed. Second, the slight variation that normally happens in fresh mixes gets "damped out" in a replenished system. The net result is that changes in developer activity, as seen on "process control strips," happens relatively slowly. A "proper" lab will see this happening and make slight adjustments to the replenishment rate to correct for this.

Speaking from years of large lab experience. (I'd might be seen as the king of fussiness if people here could have seen our operation.)

But to your point (I didn't quote it all) about processing only 4 rolls, yeah, I agree that trying to set up replenishment is kinda pointless. In that sort of situation.

over on the large format photography forum the standard doctrine is the opposite of how you feel.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

over on the large format photography forum the standard doctrine is the opposite of how you feel.

Different context, application, and set of variables.

 

[MattKing]

This thread has fussed enough.
Weird off-topic posts deleted and thread closed.