What's funny is how much strife is created over a bottle of red / brownish stuff.
NB23, dude, chill the fuck out, Ansel isn't a demi-god, and no he didn't get famous by shooting junk food, but Martin Parr certainly did.
Viridari, congrats on the 23CII, keep at it, and make sure to break some of those cardinal darkroom rules here and there. They're boring.
And, if i might add, before this thread should just die already, I'll put forth a quiz.
I'll give 6 months of renewed APUG subscription to the first person to tell me which image was made on a Rodinal neg, an AB55 neg, an Xtol neg, and a D76 neg. You know, since it's so plainly easy to tell which developer does what.
Give me the negs or a proper print of each of those images and I'll give you the right answers.
For all I know, these scans could all be lightroomed and silverefex'd from
A P&S. If you are really serious about it and not just smartarsing us, I will PM you my address for you to send me the negs/prints. It will then be my pleasure to play.
It is a trick question. None of the images came from "a Rodinal neg, an AB55 neg, an Xtol neg, and a D76 neg".
Originally Posted by Chris Lange
You probably used only one developer at a time for each of the images.
Irritating pedantry aside, well done viridari.
I expect I would enjoy a spirited discussion with you about the pros and cons of stand development. Personally, I am not a convert for general use of the technique, but I would be happy to hear your arguments for it, especially if some photographs are involved.
I swear, there is something in the APUG water lately that is making people really grumpy. I would hate to imagine what a neophyte would think had they asked such an innocent question as to how to maximize results from a given film/developer combination. We are doing more harm than good for the film community by making personal attacks on someone who is not only curious enough to ask a question, but motivated to do some serious testing of a hyphothesis. It is far below us to cast personal aspersions on someone for simply having a different workflow than we ourselves are accustomed to using.
Originally Posted by NB23
Many of the great European photographers made their names documenting life in sidewalk cafes and hole-in-the-wall restaurants, but it is below us to take a picture in an American fast food restaurant? Really? As for stand or semi-stand development, there are numerous threads here on APUG in which these processes are discussed in great detail, and with respect for the photographers using these processes. Why choose this discussion to denigrate someone for using the process?
Why is it necessary that the OP proves that his process is not digitally adulterated? Is his word not good enough for you?
The film photography community should be positive and supportive. This kind of personal attack is below us. Go take some pictures, for goodness sake, and don't come back until you feel you can be civil.
Standing ovation Tom....
The water seems to be filled with skunked beer or something I swear too!
I admire the OP for bringing up a topic, that is what a community is for, to talk....
If we all sat around and said, "It's been done, just check the great texts (aka archives)." Then why the heck is this a FORUM?! He...
I don't get it either. Though I don't agree with stand, I even tried to mirror the OP's process, just to give his theory a check, posted my results, instead of dismissing him.
Talk folks! As Tom says, give each other the same benefit that you'd give em if you were sharing a pizza and a drink shooting the breeze....just don't drink and bring here a skunked drink, sour and bitter...heeee
Originally Posted by Toffle
Thank you, Tom.
I agree. I was even considering a thread on the subject. The past couple months seem to have had a very adversarial tone in general on the forum. It's one thing to debate and disagree, and another to argue and insult.
Originally Posted by Toffle
Maybe it's just time to turn on the light and open the door to get outside for some fresh air. I recommend shooting (hand held) with the bulkiest camera we have for exercise.