Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,564   Posts: 1,545,308   Online: 841
      
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 57
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    683
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    It's not? That's a revolutionary thought.
    Digital camera is like a scanner - digitizing, hence digital intermediate.
    Photography, as in Group ƒ/64 terms or APUG terms, is very different kinda thing.

  2. #32
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,306
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkroom317 View Post
    But the same is true of gum bichromate, cyanotype and photogravure in comparison to silver gelatin methods.
    Darkroom317, You make a valid point

  3. #33
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkroom317 View Post
    But the same is true of gum bichromate, cyanotype and photogravure in comparison to silver gelatin methods.
    Not really. All those involve chemically light sensitized materials, chemically converted to viewable forms. The sensitization and chemicals are different, but it's an inherently chemical process. It has no electricity used from outside (had to throw that in before someone started talking about ions and such.)

    The idea that "digital is not a medium" seems absurd to me. Care to elaborate on why not?

    But the problem with having it take its own direction and be distinct in artistic expression seems to be that it's essentially doing the same thing (the points above) as analog - using a lens to focus light from the physical world onto a sensitized (electronically in the case of digital) surface in order to record a visual rendering of that world. By necessity it's going to look more like analog than different. It is true that you can do a lot more and more extreme departures from a realistic rendering using digital methods. Extreme HDR that was mentioned is one, easily combining different elements into a scene that never actually existed in nature is another. That can be done in the darkroom but is difficult and limited compared to doing it in Photoshop. But any time these get too far removed from reality or at least the look of reality they seem to get dismissed as excess. Maybe that's the key and what's being discussed here. As long as it's not portrayed AS reality, along with all the mischief that could cause in certain contexts, there should be less complaint when digital artists combine elements in creative ways.
    Last edited by Roger Cole; 12-02-2012 at 11:02 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Rafal Lukawiecki View Post
    ..What I feel, however, is that digital has not stood, yet, fully on its own feet, at least judging by the work I have been exposed to, with a few exceptions. I would like to see what digital can offer in terms of its own language, very much. I am sure there are amazing and unique expressions still to be discovered, and that we have not seen even the beginning of it, yet....

    ...It is a very exciting time to be involved in photography, a craft on the cusp of a major change in its artistic function.

    I think you touch on a good point there. It is maybe a little early to see the full potential of the digital movement. With sensors ever increasing in potential, maybe it is not the prints we should be looking at. The images digital is likely to be able to capture very soon will be far beyond the latitude of film. But that is not common yet, so maybe it is a little early to adopt a separate vision on digital shooting. I hope the manufacturers don't think the same way however, there might be some work left in lens technology and printing to capture all of that in a final print.

    But it is most definetely a very exciting time.

    I will be sticking my head in the sand for a few years though. Getting back into film until digital has made a firm stand and looks like something that suits my style. If not I can at least buy Fuji with the savings I made by not buying new equipment every two years and keep shooting Velvia.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    JeRuFo,

    You cover a lot in few sentences...

    Only the last point, I don't mean to fault someone for wanting to emulate analog with digital... I just mean they should be excluded from membership in the movement...

    There could be a separate movement for the mirror image of the old pictorialists, the digital photographers who want to create simulated analog prints. And they can be encouraged to do a good job. In a sense, their work is a form of... printing (reproduction). Their manifesto could be a sort of "democratization of the press". No longer is printing limited to presses that weigh several tons. An inkjet can do it. Or no print, just monitor.
    Yes, I think you're right. You wouldn't need a new movement if you didn't actually change anything.

    I feel you should keep the processes that you like and actually work well in the digital age.

    It is quite hard to give a short view on this point. It probably differs per image and the purpose you want to give it. Democratization is a good word, time will do it's work and weed out the best loved and most practical techniques, the rest will hopefully be displayed by a few persevering artisans and eventually a friendly curator that doesn't mind some fumes in his clinical world of digital perfection.

  6. #36
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,306
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by JeRuFo View Post
    It is maybe a little early to see the full potential of the digital movement...

    I will be sticking my head in the sand for a few years though. Getting back into film until digital has made a firm stand and looks like something that suits my style...
    I'm fortunate to live in a town where a pioneer of digital photographer has his studio. His Grand Canyon photos from 10 years ago are remarkable, though at the time I had no interest in outfitting myself with a Mac laptop and Betterlight scanning back. I did not feel like going out like the old pioneers with their wet-plate darkrooms.

    While reminiscing, I just found a self-portrait digital black and white shot taken May 3, 2003. In that shot the Bessa II is sitting next to me on the table... It's the same scene as my current avatar. So I used to shoot digital and film at the same time. Shameless

  7. #37
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,866
    Silver gelatin, oil paint, bronze, are media. Digital files are information; a digital file could just as easily be a representation of a symphony or a text or a 3 dimensional world or anything. Digital photography may be a discipline but the media 'digital photography' does not exist.

  8. #38
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,893
    How about "ink jet" then? How about "monitor display" then?

    I still don't agree and I think digital, or more accurately "digital sensors" are a medium.

  9. #39
    CPorter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    West KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,662
    Images
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by georg16nik View Post
    Digital camera is like a scanner - digitizing, hence digital intermediate.
    Photography, as in Group ƒ/64 terms or APUG terms, is very different kinda thing.
    Perhaps we call it a "digigraph", even still, it is a photograph, it captures light and the light forms an image.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    683
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by CPorter View Post
    Perhaps we call it a "digigraph", even still, it is a photograph, it captures light and the light forms an image.
    Yeah, an image... after the analog data gets processed, digitally, hence is closer to an already existing term digital intermediate.
    An image that is not archival out of the box, that's hell of an image, and lot cheaper than film.

    I guess You can call it whatever You want, since a digitally captured movie (motion picture) is still referred to as film

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin