Originally Posted by nsurit
do a search. This subject has been gone over many times. The gist is that in many instances it is easier to get a digital image that looks more like the print when scanning the neg than it is when scanning the print it self. This is true for myself. We do ask that when people who scan negs post images that look either like the print or like the print they intend to make. Everyone knows it is not perfect. It does leave the site open for some criticism, but far less than we received when we had the grey area and far less than we would receive if we tried to enforce a print only image posting.
I do appreciate that you didn't or haven't called APUG out for haveing a gallery made up of scans (digital images) as most do when arguing for a grey area or against the site's orthodoxy.
You raise another issue here Mister Callow. I can but I rarely do scan negs (up to 5x4) and actually it's remarkably easy to emulate how they'll print, on my usual FB papers digitally.
Against my base instincts I may have to go down that route as I have no darkroom access for around 10 moths of each year, and it would let me pre-visualise and edit before I go into extremely limited darkroom time.
So do I need to remove the laptop computer from the darkroom? :)
Ken, why should you ?
As long as it doesn't fog your paper......
As for the scanning of neg's is concerned: a friend of mine came back from Poland with some horrible flat B&W 35mm neg's.
She wanted to waste them, I scanned some and raised the contrast, results: the neg's were saved and printed and looked a lot better than previously thought.
So even the hybrid part can help you in the darkroom to get better prints.
Originally Posted by archphoto
IMHO your friend had the right idea, trash the junk, learn the lessons, and back off to Poland to try again.
AFAIAC the biggest curse of Digital is getting sucked into wasting time saving something that should be trashed.
If we (the users of APUG) were to start using digital as a crutch any time analog methods get tough or inconvenient we'd end up as a digital forum.
Our photographic aspirations and APUG's focus doesn't need to be practical, easy, or fit everybody's life. That is not what makes APUG special.
APUG is special because it's focus is Analog.
Here are a couple of images that were selected for the Plastic Fantastic exhibition with the Texas Photographic Society. Both are traditional silver gelatin prints enlarged in the darkroom. Both have also been printed using hybrid alt processing techniques. Actually the first two are mine. All 52 that were selected are on this site. Bill Barber
And your point is what?
Originally Posted by nsurit
That good work can be done in a hybrid workflow.
That somebody here fudged the rules.
People can do good work in a full digital workflow too.
It doesn't mean I want to discuss color management or get back into the digital rat race.
People can do good work in a full analog workflow too.
None of this is exactly breaking news.
So, my question for you is why is it so important pollute this site with hybrid ideas when there are so many other sites that deal with digital?
Mark, have a pleasant night. Bill Barber
Bill's point seems to be that if he can't get his way than at least he will needle people. Amazingly similar to what other members have done in the past under the same and similar circumstances.
Which reminds me there is a hybrid group here on apug: http://www.apug.org/forums/groups/hy...oto-group.html Try it out.