Why not Digital?

DREW WILEY · May 22, 2015

I had a young backpacking sidekick that ditched his digital cameras once he saw some of my view camera prints. He knew he couldn't manage that kind of apparatus in his house (which was a perk residence, since he was a Park employee), so compromised with MF gear and roll film. He wanted to get started right away so used a changing bag to load roll film drums for development. Then to check his progress, he'd scan the neg for viewing, at least until he purchased his own house and finished equipping a real darkroom. Well, he did get the house; but three kids have since come along, so he's still scanning. That's often the case nowadays. The other game plan I often see among the younger crowd, who can't even afford to buy property, is a simple sheet film tray ladder in a black-out bathroom, and contact printing. Rental darkrooms are locally available, but most beginners don't spend enough time in them to get proficient, so bail.

brian steinberger · May 22, 2015

Michael R 1974 said:
Brian, (just to be a pain), suppose you were a few inches further away from the print and couldn't see the grain, are you saying you could tell a well made silver print from a well made digital print based on its tonality? To take this challenge a logical step further (since relatively few film shooters make silver prints), are you sure you could tell the difference between a silver print made from either a film negative or a digital negative (or tell the difference between a digital print made from either a film negative or a digital "capture")? Be honest now.

Michael, no, from further away I may not be able to tell the difference from an inkjet print vs. silver gelatin. And the hybrid processes I've personally never seen prints from this process in person. I'm simply only speaking from my personal work. I prefer the end result I'm getting from my workflow. What works well for anyone else is fine for them. I would personally not be satisfied putting an inkjet print out as my own work, no matter how good anyone thinks it is. It's just not how I like to work. It's just not the medium I prefer.

Michael R 1974 said:
I'm not sure about the "hard work" part either. I just don't think we can assume that.

Again, I'm simply speaking from my own work. I may spend up to 6-8 hours just produce one print, and that much time put into "a hobby" equates to hard work, in my opinion. Maybe I'm just not good enough yet to crank out 3 fine prints from 3 different negs in an hour. Also, unlike yourself and Roger, I much prefer the end product (the fine print) more than the process itself (darkroom work in general). I mean isn't the fine print the end result?? Isn't that why we all do this? (those that print silver gelatin anyway).

brian steinberger · May 22, 2015

Digital can require alot of hard work too, no doubt. However that hard work could be spent sitting in front of a computer, messing with printer profiles, or cleaning printers. None of that sounds fun to me. And even though darkroom work is "frustrating/stressful" as you put it Michael (and I fully agree) it is still fun and exciting to me every time I go into a printing session, especially when a print is finished just as envisioned. So I do enjoy the process, even though at times it is "frustrating/stressful", yet I persevere and am rewarded for it... sometimes!

Oh, and camera work is by far my favorite part of the process!

Prof_Pixel · May 22, 2015

brian steinberger said:
Michael, no, from further away I may not be able to tell the difference from an inkjet print vs. silver gelatin. And the hybrid processes I've personally never seen prints from this process in person. I'm simply only speaking from my personal work. I prefer the end result I'm getting from my workflow. What works well for anyone else is fine for them. I would personally not be satisfied putting an inkjet print out as my own work, no matter how good anyone thinks it is. It's just not how I like to work. It's just not the medium I prefer.

I looked at the 'In the Garden' photographic exhibit at the George Eastman House this afternoon and found it impossible to tell if the prints (B&W or color) were optical or ink-jet without looking at the information tag for each image.

Sirius Glass · May 22, 2015

I find that "frustrating/stressful" darkroom work really is better than a day at work.

Roger Cole · May 23, 2015

Michael R 1974 said:
You might be right, Roger. I don't know for sure (my wording somewhere earlier in the thread was better). I'm basing this on what I see in the APUG gallery and LFF image threads. Most seem to be negative scans, sometimes with scanner info, and no print info. Of course this doesn't necessarily mean there are no prints, but I really doubt there are in most cases. Same goes for technical threads. They seem to mostly involve developing film ultimately destined for scanning, and the enlarging/darkroom forums have a lot of tumbleweed blowing through.

Maybe I should go back to hanging out more on the LFPF. I miss it in a way (check in occasionally) but just don't have time to spend so much time both places. Of course lots of folks there scan and it's permitted to talk about, but you usually know which someone is talking about saying "well there's no way to optically print it in black and white" won't raise any eyebrows.

Roger Cole · May 23, 2015

MattKrull said:
I had the exact same though process, but ended up with an 8x10 instead of a 4x5. My constraint is that I don't even have space for a 4x5 enlarger (I have a small setup-teardown darkroom in a bathroom). So enlargements from either 4x5 or 8x10 would need to be scanned, and at least with an 8x10 I can do contact prints at the size I want.

That makes perfect sense of course. If I didn't have room for my 4x5 enlarger I can see that. As it is, I have two - the D2V I've had since the 90s and a spare chassis I picked up for parts, with two variable condenser heads and an LED lamphouse so I feel fairly set.

blansky · May 24, 2015

Michael R 1974 said:
I think in my case it's mostly my personality, but also the fact that I don't have the luxury of being able to do darkroom work continuously, so to some extent every time I start a printing session I feel that nervousness, like it is a performance or something. Still love it though.

Buy the darkroom some flowers and a bottle of wine.

Seriously though, it's like making love or a planned night of seduction. You get your ducks in a row, get your music set up, set out all your toys, paper, chemistry, fill the trays with the ingredients, then when you are ready, turn down the lights and make some magic.

There comes a time in everything we do when we have to stop thinking and just let it flow.

You don't have performance anxiety when you set the stage, then just let it evolve. And the music helps.

Bob Carnie · May 24, 2015

Regarding nervousness of approaching the darkroom... I get that feeling all the time , in fact right now I am about to print...

I find the set up of the room very tiresome and boring, so what I have tried to do is take an hour, clean my negs and glass neg carriers and set up the first four negs to print,
then I clean up the table tops and easels.. next I clean the trays and set them up, mix a lot of fresh chemicals - today I am working on mural print then moving to smaller prints so I had to mix large for the big trays get my hypo clear set up and after all this is done I walk upstairs.... right now typing this post.... I will have a small lunch or break and THEN GO downstairs to the negatives....

I find that setting up and walking away for a while relaxes me... think hockey - you go out to the ice, take a bunch of shots , stretch and then go back inside while the ice is cleaned... 1/2 hour later you go out and play..

I have found that by separating to two elements of the printing liberating .. I encourage some to try this... When I go downstairs now I feel better , everything is in place and I have had time to contemplate the negatives I am going to attack and put on the headphones , crank up the volumne and print.

I am not looking for lenses, filters, any bullshit, just print.

Sirius Glass · May 24, 2015

I do not get worked up and nervous when I start darkroom work. I look forward with to being back in the darkroom and letting the magic happen.

Hatchetman · May 24, 2015

Some interesting points. Working in Photoshop generally winds up with me in a foul mood due to frustration of not knowing how to do things. Darkroom work almost always relaxes me and calms me down. The only exception is if I've been at it for several hours and I'm getting fatigued and I've already spend 2 hours on this damn print and its not what I want but I think ONE MORE TRY should do it. Still nowhere near as aggravating as Photoshop. LOL.

And yes, I agree with Bob. Set up kind of sucks. Do it, then take a break, get a snack, go to the bathroom. Get ready for 2-3 hours of peace and quiet in the dark.

Sirius Glass · May 24, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
I do not get worked up and nervous when I start darkroom work. I look forward with to being back in the darkroom and letting the magic happen.

My set up is fast. I put cardboard in the window over the wood blinds and then use the velcro strips to hand the blackout curtain in the dry darkroom. In the master bathroom, the wet darkroom, I put a board across the double sinks, put a shaped board with the blackout curtain in the window, then I tape the blackout cloth to the wall.

The safe light is already set up with the enlarger; the wet darkroom I plug in two additional safe lights. The fan switch turns on a safe light in the wet darkroom. Once set up I can leave it set up for days or weeks if I want.

analoguey · May 24, 2015

Bob Carnie said:
Regarding nervousness of approaching the darkroom... I get that feeling all the time , in fact right now I am about to print...

I find the set up of the room very tiresome and boring, so what I have tried to do is take an hour, clean my negs and glass neg carriers and set up the first four negs to print,
then I clean up the table tops and easels.. next I clean the trays and set them up, mix a lot of fresh chemicals - today I am working on mural print then moving to smaller prints so I had to mix large for the big trays get my hypo clear set up and after all this is done I walk upstairs.... right now typing this post.... I will have a small lunch or break and THEN GO downstairs to the negatives....

I find that setting up and walking away for a while relaxes me... think hockey - you go out to the ice, take a bunch of shots , stretch and then go back inside while the ice is cleaned... 1/2 hour later you go out and play..

I have found that by separating to two elements of the printing liberating .. I encourage some to try this... When I go downstairs now I feel better , everything is in place and I have had time to contemplate the negatives I am going to attack and put on the headphones , crank up the volumne and print.

I am not looking for lenses, filters, any bullshit, just print.

That sounds like a great suggestion Bob! I'll try it the next time I'm heading to the darkroom.

Paul Verizzo · May 24, 2015

momus said:
Just tell them its because digital image quality sucks. Because it does.

I live in classic and hot rod ground central (Daytona Beach). Don't assume that someone built a rod just because they're driving one. Lots of the people out here hire all that out, or simply buy one all cherried out from the get go. Loot at his fingernails. If they're well manicured and clean, he didn't turn a wrench on it, and trust me, he shoots digital. The rods I see nowadays are a far cry from the ones we built and ran. Today's cars have A/C, power steering, and automatic trannys! No one would be caught dead driving something w/ an automatic transmission when I grew up.

Oh, please! Digital images do not suck at all in anyway at today's state of the art. Once upon a time lots of issues. No longer. Your attitude is elitist and just plain wrong.

I was an early adapter of digital, ca. 1999. One point something megapixel imaging. Memory was $2/MEGAbyte.

As the years and cameras went by, I noticed that now everyone with some room on their Visa card is suddenly, allegedly, a photographer. I also noticed that I just, plain and simple, missed shooting and developing film whether color or B&W. And the fact that scanners could now, um, scan negatives well, "well," why not shoot film again?

One does not need to appreciate only one or the other. Both are great! Ansel Adams was shown an early digital camera setup by Kodak, everything was wired, a few hundred megapixels, not long before he died. He thought it great!

I do too. As I do Tri-X and T-Max.

msage · May 25, 2015

blansky said:
Buy the darkroom some flowers and a bottle of wine.

Seriously though, it's like making love or a planned night of seduction. You get your ducks in a row, get your music set up, set out all your toys, paper, chemistry, fill the trays with the ingredients, then when you are ready, turn down the lights and make some magic.

There comes a time in everything we do when we have to stop thinking and just let it flow.

You don't have performance anxiety when you set the stage, then just let it evolve. And the music helps.

I love that!!

ME Super · May 25, 2015

Paul Verizzo said:
Oh, please! Digital images do not suck at all in anyway at today's state of the art. Once upon a time lots of issues. No longer. Your attitude is elitist and just plain wrong.

I was an early adapter of digital, ca. 1999. One point something megapixel imaging. Memory was $2/MEGAbyte.
.

I remember paying for memory to upgrade my TRS-80 back in the day. Memory was even more expensive then at $1/KILObyte. About 10 years after that I got a 2.5 GB IDE (now they call it PATA) hard drive for $400. Memory (RAM) and storage (Hard Drives) are cheap these days by comparison.

I'm one of those guys who also does not think that digital images suck. It's the presentation layer in film that ends up being better than a digital presentation layer. Your fancy HD TV has a resolution under 2MP (if it's a 720p TV it's even less). The UHD TVs have decent resolution (around 8MP), it's around this resolution that I see digital presentation approaching that of a projected slide.

Why not Digital?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency