On 26/5/04, DAVID MIERS, discombobulated, offered: >Kevin > >It would be better to have a photography class in digital then no >photography class, but I would agree with the comments that it is better to >learn in a chemical darkroom. I too just finished a photography class in >college and since I started the wrong way had to relearn the right way how >to take photographs. I found that I was way to dependant on the color to >make my images interesting. Limiting myself to B & W that had to be >developed in a darkroom taught me how to see things differently in the >camera viewer. It is a time tested method that properly teaches the student >how to properly compose an image with proper lighting. I started with a >digital camera and worked my way back to film cameras. I found digital very >easy as I'm sort of a natural with anything computer related for the most >part. Contrary to another comment on this thread, it was the chemical >darkroom that challenged me and really made me work hard, reach down deep >inside myself to create a good image. I found myself having a deeper >understanding of Photoshop especially with regard to the dodge and burn >brushes. However to this day I cannot recreate the dodge and burn effects >in Photoshop that I can now do in a chemical dark room. Working with an >enlarger vs. a scanner taught me much more about film grain as well. Grain >is part of the art form of Photography and while it can be inserted in a >computer, never looks right to me. All the noise and dust that is part of >digital photography is not attractive. > >Taking the picture, developing the film, printing it on an enlarger, and >developing in in chemical trays, all by hand, made me feel much more like an >artist and gave me much the same satisfaction that I suspect a painter feels >upon finishing their painting. I never felt that with the digital format, >be it directly from a digital camera or a film based scanner. My experience >with analog B & W has greatly helped me to create a better B & W image on >the computer as well since I now at least know how it "should look". > >If the school decides to pursue the digital class they really need to find >cameras that have at least 5 or 6 available apertures on them as well as >several available shutter speeds all with manual options. From my own >experience that is one of biggest problems with digital P&S that they have >only a couple of options here. It needs to have a B & W option as well as >the ability to turn the flash completely off. If your going to use a flash, >my instructor literally pounded this into our heads, the last place you ever >want to use it is on the camera itself! Thus you need to have a camera with >wireless flash option or has a flash PC terminal or limit the students to >not use flash at all which for the most part is better anyways. > >I now look upon the idea of film vanishing with great sadness. Photography >is classified as a Fine Art, but I don't think I ever really understood why, >until taking this class. I question whether or not Photography's status as >a Fine Art will continue into the digital world. I would have to say my >instructor did his job well. And he gave me an "A" too!!! Yayyy... 8) > >Dave
You nearly (but not quite) made me cry, Dave. That's a bloody good reason. I've changed my mind - there's a good reason for pursuing a chemical darkroom! I've got some film somewhere...... Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________
