Why B&W Forum is 4x More Active than the Color Forum?

[RedSun]

I just want to make the record straight. I started this thread since I see there are more posts on B&W, compared to color. I was curious as to why. Then I made some observations and wanted to see what the other folks think. Most of the discussions are objective and I could see from other angles. But some of the folks, like this Roger Cole boy, started to argue, even tried to attack me. :confused: It is fine you can have your opinion and I can have my opinion. You do not have to get excited just because of the way someone else thinks differently.

Whatever it goes, it is always good to have an open mind and listen to what others have to say.

We should close this thread and do not get this out of control. Absolutely no need to get excited, or agitated

 

[Roger Cole]

troll, troll, troll.....


I said it earlier.

And I agree now.

 

[RedSun]

Blah, blah, blah....

 

[Roger Cole]

"Ignore this thread" - it's a wonderful thing. Buhbye.

 

[perkeleellinen]

Is this a joke?

For color, in addition to density and contrast, you'll have to consider color balance. The darkroom practices are also harder: safelight is not safe with color, more stringent requirements on chemical temperature and the faster aging of color paper.

I just want to pick up on this even though this thread is coming to an end.

A few posters have demonstrated so far that a safelight is safe with colour and many use chemicals at room temperature. It's not a joke to claim this. Once you have some experience the colour balance issue isn't really that much of an issue. Colour paper does age quicker, but that doesn't make printing more difficult.

I think it's correct to say that once you've nailed RA4, there's little to talk about. With B&W there's so many variations to chat about.

 

[RedSun]

"Ignore this thread" - it's a wonderful thing. Buhbye.

Then just go away..... Is that easy? Why do you still sniff around??

 

[Bill Burk]

"while maintaining the syntax of two millenniums ago..." Err, that would be the syntax of 0012, then - classical Latin?

So funny. I use Google to see how to spell Millennium and don't take the time to lookup what it means.

 

[pentaxuser]

Redsun, since my post pointing out that certain safelights were safe with colour RA4 printing at least three others who have had experience with RA4 have said the same but you still state the opposite.

These three are not the only three whom I know to have stated this. Over the years and thousands of posts on colour others have also stated the same.

If you regard APUG as a forum to ask questions and gain knowledge I think you need to ask yourself why APUGers whom in the past I have never seen getting annoyed, have done so.

One day those APUGers who can help you may decide not to do so or have already done so based on an impression you have given them which would be a pity for you. It won't affect them.

I have assumed so far that your aim is not deliberate provocation. If so then I suggest you ask yourself how to get information and discuss matters on APUG without upsetting others.

When it is clear that your position differs diametrically from others and the discussion can go no further without things getting nasty then it is time to say " I respect your position but we will have to agree to differ" It works wonders.

Sometimes threads come to a natural end and it is then time to move on.

pentaxuser

 

[RedSun]

I think I asked the right question at the wrong forum. This is a B&W forum. So no members here would admit that B&W is easier to do on the technical side. That is fine. We just move on.

On the safelight discussion, it is not me who says that safelight is not suitable for color printing. If you open any books on photography, read any labels on any color papers, they all say the same thing. I've heard some horror stories on some stores who sell cut color papers cut under some "safelight" and the papers were all fogged. I know Thomas safelight has the filters for color printing, but users have different opinions on it. I have the Thomas light and color filters, but I do not use it for color printing.

Same thing with processing in open tanks and in room temperature. Room temperatures can range between 605 F to 75 F. I do not think that the results would be the same with the same room temperature chemicals.

It is like going to a building work area where there is a sign "Keep out, Dangerous". But someone does not believe it and goes there often. Then he would say it is perfect safe to ignore the warning. Then some day, a brick fell and hit him hard.....

Anyway, if someone does not agree with my observation, that is fine. This person does not have to use strong words against me. I realize I asked in the wrong forum. We just move on....

 

[eddie]

I haven't printed color in a long time but, when I did, it was RA4, in trays, at room temperature. The chemistry temperature would drop (or rise) about 5 degrees, during the sessions, depending on whether it was winter or summer. To check on shifts, at the end of the printing session I would return to the first negative and re-print it. There was absolutely no change in the results.

 

[Klainmeister]

I dunno. I've seen safelights used with color. Maybe I am just a wacko. Take some time and really try to master either technique instead of belittling one over the other or inferring information without experience. From the other posts, it's clear experience in darkroom, whether color or BW, is lacking.

Added to ignore list. Done Trolling.

 

[RedSun]

Huh, another one? If you keep posting, that means you do read it and not ignore it. I've not seen a more silly way to make a statement.
I started working in darkroom probably before you picked a camera the first time.

 

[pentaxuser]

We just move on....

Haven't we moved on yet? I really think we should


pentaxuser

 

[RedSun]

Someone does not

 

[perkeleellinen]

It is like going to a building work area where there is a sign "Keep out, Dangerous". But someone does not believe it and goes there often. Then he would say it is perfect safe to ignore the warning. Then some day, a brick fell and hit him hard.....

some people even ignore expiry dates on films and use them rather than throw them away.

 

[Oxleyroad]

Suzanne is right isn't she? Most who shoot colour scan and we don't talk about that. I wonder how many colour printers there are here. 50?

I am a colour printer

Find it too hard to hybrid print from colour negs/slides at home. Easier in the darkroom for me.

 

[perkeleellinen]

Add your voice here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Oxleyroad]

Add your voice here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Already had. Post #23

 

[Iskra 2]

Did B&W in HS, Cibachrome till it's demise, alot of inkjet/lab color, now a little bit of B&W once again. All the inkjet/lab color is faded away, even the stuff under glass/covered. The Cibachrome is indestructible, the old B&W Panalure is holding it's own and the real silver B&W is timeless. I don't waste my time or money on color printing now. Regards.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Did B&W in HS, Cibachrome till it's demise, alot of inkjet/lab color, now a little bit of B&W once again. All the inkjet/lab color is faded away, even the stuff under glass/covered. The Cibachrome is indestructible, the old B&W Panalure is holding it's own and the real silver B&W is timeless. I don't waste my time or money on color printing now. Regards.

My sole interest is in enunciating the world with colour. I do occasionally dabble in B&W but nowhere near as often or as much as around 20 years ago.
And how does one qualify that "Cibachrome is indestructible"? The best of the Ilfochrome printers will tell you it's not indestructible. It actually can fade, is prone to scuffing, creasing and scratching. The stuff has staying power, certainly, but expose it to heat (as many Ilfochrome prints in poorly set up galleries are) and it will fade rapidly. I'm personally glad we are free of Ilfochrome now, despite having a lot to say about its demise at the time (along with the extraordinarily frequent price rises and factory demands for larger roll orders). Modern alternative materials have got a leg up on the old bastion of Ilfochrome and will continue to improve in the next few years — I know this by comparing test work of 14 years ago to current work produced for gallery/exhibition. I don't consider the world to be a poorer place in the absence of Ilfochrome, colour darkrooms, B&W darkrooms, traditional printing or, for that matter, the emergency of the digital revolution and the likely loss of film within 15 years. Just go with what you are comfortable with, for as long as you want. No sweat if something is lost by the roadside in the journey.

 

[Iskra 2]

And how does one qualify that "Cibachrome is indestructible"?

Easy, compare a Ciba print with a fibre print. No contest, the fibre print is a fragile piece of paper.

The best of the Ilfochrome printers will tell you it's not indestructible. It actually can fade, is prone to scuffing, creasing and scratching.

Are you kidding us, without referring you to the archival experts, my Ciba prints have never faded. All my R4 prints have.

The stuff has staying power, certainly, but expose it to heat (as many Ilfochrome prints in poorly set up galleries are) and it will fade rapidly.

Much much slower than an R4 print.

Just go with what you are comfortable with, for as long as you want. No sweat if something is lost by the roadside in the journey.

Agreed. However, Ciba and Kodachrome have not been matched yet. Peace. Regards

 

[zsas]

More photographers do black & white processing and printing than color processing and printing.

Bingo!