In "theory" I don't see why APUG couldn't/shouldn't have a forum for hybrid work. Not sure where you'd draw the proverbial line though. When I think about hybrid work I think the most acceptable form of it within an overall APUG context is the making of enlarged negatives for contact printing in the darkroom (anything from silver gelatin to whatever old alt process you can think of). Using the computer to make enlarged negatives allows virtually any wet process to be used (as I write this I'm thinking about the huge platinum prints Michael Massaia makes). This is all fine, but might be too limited for some people. I would not be in favour of digital capture (cameras, memory cards etc) or digital output on APUG. What I worry about is how mixed up things could get. You have forums on here for alternative process, contact printing etc. But if you add some other Wet Darkroom/Digital forum, wouldn't they logically cross over? And you'd have to allow all the discussions about scanners and scanning, wouldn't you? Then again what do I know about all this. I'm an old fashioned darkroom-only guy and I don't care much for alternative processes, lith etc.
I truly believe this site APUG is where a hybrid forum should exist, keeping it on track would be hard as you point out . I think I remember for a very short time Sean and John created this section here, but soon it morphed into Dpug.
Aim points in PS is moderately difficult to grasp and important when making my enlarged negatives,,, but really when you think about it it does fall into the placement of zones in a 0-100 density language and I have learned a lot about the process lately by working with LAB and establishing things like minimum shadow detail points, minimum highlight detail points... I think Ansel Adams and Fred Picker would agree with this mixing of technology.
The LVT recorders Michael M and Larry G use can indeed create negative that go in enlarger, I just produced some film off my Lambda, for contact on Ilford Warmtone that is every bit as good end product as an enlarge print from the original negative..... This technology can be used in any darkroom, big , small, laundry room, bedroom, garage, or darkrooms like Robert Halls and Steve Sherman.
2012 is the year where a lot of this interesting work will be introduced, great workers like Kerik, Sandy, Bill, Ike , Ron, Mark, and many many others have seen the possibility's , all members here and I know of at least 30 others pushing the envelope, and in all cases a wet print. The overall effect of them all talking here would be fantastic and good for the 50 k members of APUG.
We have lost a lot of talent since I joined here. Also a lot of bad apples seem to have left as well, but since I only have two threads, film and paper open I do not see the rest of what is going on on this site.
I believe the more the envelope is pushed you will see one or two of the big manufacturers and I am not placing any bets here, but one of them will combine the simplicity of a Rhoe flatbead printer and the old Chromalin method of laying down pigmented colour and produce a device that can produce permanent Colour Prints using a mixture of methods... But we have to talk about the possibilitys and not put blinders on... We need the wet technology and we need the dark side.
If we are all honest here, Colour Carbon Prints by Todd Gangler and John Bentley or Colour Gum Prints by Keith Taylor are admired and talked about freely on this site, but honestly, the their film is scanned , and outputed on digital image setters onto film, then they move to the darkroom to make permanent prints. I see this as a bit of a disconnect.
So why would we not embrace this as darkroom workers?????
Nothing wrong with an all analogue approach and I for one work this way a large % of any year soley in Analogue methodology, probably quite more than the strictest police here.
but there are more ways get workers into the darkroom which means more materials being purchased by our suppliers and this does include alternative working methods.
Originally Posted by Michael R 1974
Reading an interesting article this morning about Kodak and Google, here: http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/13/opinio...html?hpt=hp_c3
I like the last line and I think it applies to what we are discussing here in some ways:
"[H]istory shows that popular technology is often supplanted by entirely new models."
The Kodak and Google trains may be heading in different directions, on different tracks. But there are other whistles sounding off in the distance, unseen for now, urgent, on their way. Always have been. Always will be.
For as much as we all enjoy the romanticism involved with technologies and processes of the past, whistles are indeed always sounding off in the distance. It is important to understand and appreciate the past (history) to pass it along to future generations and therefore educate in a way that is viable for young people to blend and thrive. So this discussions doesn't get sidetracked by party politics about what's correct to do on APUG, the subject that Bob brought in focus was one of the slow demise of analog printing (actually printing in general) and the fact that young people need to be educated about processes that blend new technology with analog, which is still the preferred and most beautiful way to present a print, for many reasons. This will bring the necessary tools to them to appreciate the medium and even build successful businesses around it. Hobbyists are fine but we all know that there has to be a strong business platform for all of this to survive.
Well to be perfectly honest as someone who has only been a subscriber for about two years I find much of it irritating to read as most of the beginner-type questions are answered with a lot of misleading nonsense. And sadly there is very little focus on printing, particularly plain old silver gelatin printing. That is a big disappointment to me. So perhaps as you suggest including some forums on digital-to-wet print might help. Not sure. It won't interest me personally but if it somehow keeps the makers of high quality products in business it benefits me in the end. Anyhow I don't want to divert the thread.
Originally Posted by Bob Carnie
In a way, when one scans a film negative here on APUG and inverts it to positive prior to posting, that's hybrid, yes? I don't mean that statement to be negative (no pun intended).
I have a lot of work produced form inkjet negs. Even a few palladium prints from direct digital capture. (I don't own a digital camera, I borrow one.) I think it would be nice to see analogue prints that had a digital phase in their production. I also understand the desire to keep this purely analogue. I guess time will tell.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
For years I had every thread open and at one point was considering leaving APUG altogether. Then Dinesh suggested just clicking on one or two threads, came over to the lab and showed me how to do it and I have to say I enjoy APUG and open my preferred threads daily and find it very useful. I just miss some of the people who have left, they had a lot to offer and debate.
Originally Posted by Michael R 1974
Last week Elevator donated to charity 8 16 x20 prints and frames to young students using phone cameras as the input device, this group of kids really did not have the resources to buy a decent camera, film or digital, The project was managed by one of my prior assistants , and it included a tour and talk in my darkroom, This small group of 15 year olds asked me more interesting questions than third year University photo school kids. I was blown away and happy to spend some time with them, they did get the chance to see an emerging print in the red light and it was fun for me to be the magician once again.
Those dissing this type of capture need to have their heads examined and really are not the people on APUG that I am reaching out too. I really do not give a shit what they think.
I work entirely analogue, and don't even own a real digital camera. As such, APUG is an oasis for me. That being said, I wouldn't mind a separate forum, here, which addresses the production of digital negatives (from a film one), as long as the purpose is producing an analogue print. I think APUG has played a part in the renewed interest in alternative, contact printed imagery, and I'd have no problem with an area dedicated to the process.
My concern is the slippery slope this could lead to. It would have to be moderated closely or it could take APUG down a path none of us would like it to see it travel. This site may be the last bastion for many of us, and I'd hate for it to lose it's primary purpose.
No argument from me on this.
Originally Posted by eddie
This is a bit off topic so feel free to ignore it:
I have been meaning to start a brainstorming thread for people to offer ideas for promoting film and darkroom. Like: Give 20 cameras with 3 rolls of film each to 20 high school kids, w/ promise of developing and contact print for each roll. Or: Take gigantic donations from various extremely generous donors and assorted wealthy types and buy film paper chemistry in large shipments for giving away at schools, photography group prizes, etc??
Or, as Bob Carnie is doing, teaching local courses to just show kids and others how cool it is to watch the image come up in the dark.
Helping APUG become tolerant of hybrid discussion would be great, but wont save film and paper.