I've soaked myself in kerosene, so you won't need your flame throwers . . . just light a match.
All the images on APUG are digital images expressed in a digital arena. Many don't even print their images, but rather just present a negative scan. Part of what I do in alternative processes requires a digital step (creating a negative from scanned film). I wonder why some digital sharing of images is OK, while others are treated like step children?
It would seem to me that if the folks in alternatives processes used a little truth in advertising, which I think all would do, their work should be no less offensive to the purist than what exists already on this site.
In my opinion, the alt processed folks should not need to go out behind the garage to talk about their work if it involves a scanned and enlarged negative. These folks do have something to share and they have as much in common with APUG ideas and principles as many who currently share their digital images while flying slightly under the radar.
Anything other than scanning problems to post on APUG goes to the sister site. This is done to prevent the APUG site from being overrun by digital scanning, post processing and printing threads.
Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!
Nothing beats a great piece of glass!
I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.
it is probably because it is the way it is.
these things used to be discussed in "the grey area"
.. i remember the good old days too ...
silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
artwork often times sold for charity
PM me for details
Unfortunately, in the sister site, there is disagreement of what is proper "hybrid". Some say digital camera, analog output, others say analog source, digital output. Frankly, it's all so childish, no matter how you slice it. At least we're not like that other all-digital site out there.
It's simple, once discussion of digital imaging is allowed here it would be impossible to police the purely digital posters. Those people have a habit of starting flaming threads arguing that film & traditional darkroom work is dead and that we should all only use Digital.
Personally I'm not anti-Digital, I have to use it for commercial reasons it's not something I discuss, but if I wanted to there's plenty of other Forums, including the Hybrid sister site.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Bill, I suppose that the established logic goes something like this: APUG promotes analogue and, since complete analogue workflows still exist (particularly when it comes to b&w), a hybrid workflow necessarily displaces an analogue step with a digital step.
In other words: there isn't anything important that the hybrid workflow can do which the analogue workflow cannot. So the worry is that people would spend time talking about the digital steps and less time on how to preserve the analogue techniques. And indeed, a lot of time is spent discussing scanners and such on the sister site.
Having said that... I do not think any artist can allow him/herself to be limited by such thinking. Whatever somebody needs to do to be creative is fine by me. I'd just rather talk about the analogue stuff here, that's all. I do hybrid and purely digital stuff too, but it doesn't bug me in the least that I don't show or talk about that here.
My minor peeve is that some people put drum scanning and LVT in the same category as digital capture or lousy scanning and photoshopping or inkjetting. That is unfortunate, since both drum and LVT continue to be enormously valuable to the analogue photographer and actually predate digital by several decades.
It is too bad that the Hybrid site gets such little traffic. It really should be a subset of APUG, much like the language forums. I don't see French inching into the English forum, do you?
It is weird that on this digital forum digital is a f-word and still photo's are placed here in a digital form.
Hybrid is a part of daily life on APUG, whether we like it or not.
When you look at the Large Format Forum there the scanning/digital section is a part of the forum itself.
This leads to less tension.
Many of us work with both digital and analogue these day's, partly because we are forced to do so by enocomic's, our clients.
Just looking at my own gear: a digital compact, but allso a XA 2, Rollei 35S and a Leica III, a DSLR for my work in Brazil, a SL66, RB67 and Rolleiflex 2.8F, a Sinar P2 4x5/8x10, a Shen Hao 4x5 and plans for a field made from Brazil Wood and yellow copper (in a design phase),
not to forget my 2 full plate tailboard's, both restauration projects.
Both analogue and digital can live in good harmony, even on APUG.
So please let us not be holier than the pope and accept the world we live in.
Shurely, nobody wants the fights whether a Nikon D is better than a Canon D, this is not the platform for it and I hope it never will be.
I am not asking APUG to become a hybrid platform, just a bit of acceptance that many of us use digital in some form or the other.
My 2 cents,
The argument that we use digital scanning to show our work on APUG is a dead horse that has been flogged into a glue pot and back out again. The galleries here are used by members to show a poor digitised representation of real wet darkroom produced prints. Our end product is not a digital file, it is the aforementioned real prints. That is why APUG's print exchanges are so popular. A negative scan is not a finished piece, that is why I do not comment on uploaded neg scans, I wait for the person to upload the scan of their finished print.
Originally Posted by archphoto
APUG is about traditional photographic processes involving light sensitive materials and chemicals. If people cannot accept that then there are thousands of sites out there which cater for people who make jpegs.
Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.
*Minolta Maxxum 7 *Minolta Dynax 600si Classic *Minolta Dynax 5 *Minolta X-300
*Minolta 28-105 RS, Minolta 50/1.7 (AF & MD), Minolta 50/2.8 Macro, Tamron 70-300
*A passion to capture God's awesome creation