You are a class act Shel. Glad you're still around. Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 2:21 PM Subject: Re: I enjoy film
> For me the issue is quality results in conventional B&W and quality > processing and achieving a certain look and feel from the color work that I > do. The digital workflow does not give me what I want, and those mini-labs > don't come close to what I consider is good color work. And while some of > the pro labs here do much better work - some of it exquisite and beyond > reproach - some of them are not much better than the cheap mini labs. But > at least I have a choice, some people don't, or not a choice that's as > easily made or attainable. > > By the time I scan a neg and then have the results processed and printed, > I've spent way too many hours for too little result. The current crop of > high end consumer scanners suck, I don't care what any techie and > digi-workflow proponent on this or any other list or web site says. The > ONLY scans I've ever gotten that meet my standards (and I'll admit they are > high) have come from the higher end Imacon and even higher end Tango drum > scanners. Truth is, I don't even find the new Nikon scanners satisfactory > for posting images to the web in many instances. But I use the scanner to > share what is some semblance of my work with others, and it provides some > fun and diversion during the small hours of the night when I can't sleep. > > So, what the hell am I doing jerking around trying to conform to the new > technology and photographic workflow if i can't get the results I want? > Makes no sense whatsoever. back to doing more conventional work, and > refreshing those skills. > > If you think digital will give you what you want, then by all means, make > the move. I'm not one to tsalk because I may get a "baby" istD, or pick up > a used istD Grande, at some point. I like the digi stuf for some things, > and want more than what my Sony camera will give me. I think the > CONVENIENCE of digital is wonderful, but, speaking as a B&W shooter, > there's nothing in the digital marketplace that will replace film. > > Don't waste your time trying to make your own chemicals, at least not in > the beginning. Learn - really learn - the process first. While it's easy, > there are many layers of subtlety that you may wish to explore. Once you > really know what you're doing, and really know what results you want and > how to achieve them, then it may be a lot of fun to mix your own chemicals, > even make your own paper. > > My first suggestion would be to get two books by Ansel Adams: The Negative > and The Print. Those books are a great starting place, even if you don't > like Adams' work or accept some of his theories. Then go see some > exhibition quality work by the great photogs and printers. And just > because a work is on exhibition does not mean it's exhibition quality. See > real prints. Reproductions in books are not even close to good quality. > You MUST know what a good print looks like (and you must be familiar with > the various styles and types of printing) before you can start making your > own prints and start developing (literally) your own style. > > You must also learn how to properly expose your film. Just getting a > "perfect" exposure based on meter readings is not good enough. You must be > able to understand light well enough to be able to creatively over or under > expose based on meter readings, and to be able to properly develop the film > for those modified exposures. This takes a little experience and practice. > It's not rocket science, but a proper exposure is paramount in obtaining > the results you want. > > > Shel > > > From: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Ok, Shel... I've read your mail and I understand what you're saying. > > But try to think from my point of view... First, I'm a programmer. I work > > with computers every day, downloading/printing/CD burning/whatever is > > trivial for me (well... Photoshop processing is not... but I could learn > > that easily if I want to). I have a computer; however, it needs an upgrade > > (already planned). As my old printer doesn't work anymore, I may as well > buy > > another one... just fine for digital prints. > > I have a film camera, because I couldn't afford a good digital one... but > > Baby-D will appear soon. I'm tired of scratched films and dull prints I > get > > from minilabs. I pay allot of money for them! (I think most minilabs here > > don't change the chemicals. Ever :( ) And I never get what I want... > > Because of that, I can say I don't enjoy film... not this way. So, what I > > can do? > > > > Well... of course I want to set-up a classic darkroom <grin> (even if I'll > > have to use the bathroom for that), in fact I'm looking for > enlargers&stuff > > like that. If you want a job done right, do it yourself... And I'm sure > I'll > > enjoy doing this! > > Problem solved. No need to "go digital"... I know I'm able to cope with > the > > digital process, but I spend too much time with computers... I won't > "enjoy" > > the process. > > > > Btw: does any of you knows any good sites about BW process? I want to > start > > with as few equipment (aka expenses) as possible, even make my own > chemicals > > if I can. The paper&films are expensive enough... (I wouldn't mind if > you'll > > share some things from your experience) > > >
