Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,587   Posts: 1,545,863   Online: 1102
      
Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789101112 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 117
  1. #61
    FiatluX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Scandinavia
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    214
    Images
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by alexmacphee View Post
    one should be cautious of being a tad too moralistic here in how it's addressed.
    Exactly my point!

  2. #62
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,658
    Images
    40
    Interesting that we are discussing how we arrive at the digital image that we post on an analog users' site -- just tickles me in a way!

    We make the reproductions in order to share what we do, as accurately and as true as we can. Basically saying, "This is what the print/finished image looks like, or will look like when I print it." So it matters not to me how one created the reproduction -- rephotographed print or PS neg scan. Personally, I like to include how I reproduced the image in the post, such as "From a scanned 4x10 carbon print".

    I just want to see what others are doing, to not have proof of what they are doing -- so I am fine with any way to faithfully reproduce our analog work for the computer screen.

    Vaughn
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  3. #63
    Ian David's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,079
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    I just want to see what others are doing, to not have proof of what they are doing -- so I am fine with any way to faithfully reproduce our analog work for the computer screen.
    Well said, Vaughn

  4. #64
    IloveTLRs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,000
    Images
    2
    I just straight-scan - that is, I pop the negs in and scan them. I don't have the patience to fool around with profiles, etc.

    I use PS mostly to remove dust - the healing brush and clone brush are a God-send! Also I sometimes use Levels to adjust for large exposure mistakes (working without a meter 95% of the time) crop out borders when doing half-frame, or straightening photos from, for example, box cameras.

    Other than that, I find adjustments unnecessary - such is the beauty of film
    Those who know, shoot film

  5. #65

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Central OK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by iandavid View Post
    . . . Clearly, not everyone treats the APUG gallery as some kind of showroom for finished fine art products, so why insist on viewing it that way?

    Ian
    Did I say that? Finished fine art products?

    I meant to say "finished works". Meaning: Photographic prints or works that exist in the form represented by the digital image in the gallery. And to make my concern clearer: If the image in the gallery is a digital fabrication, does it really belong there?

  6. #66
    MaximusM3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    756
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Cesaraugusta View Post
    Did I say that? Finished fine art products?

    If the image in the gallery is a digital fabrication, does it really belong there?
    Well, then we wouldn't have a gallery at all because even the scan of a wet print is a digital representation/fabrication of the actual print which, by the way, could also be a crappy print that has been digitally corrected (you know, dodging, burning, curves, etc). It is unfair and unsafe to assume that every wet print being scanned and presented is unadulterated, while a negative is automatically seen as dubious. I could make the same adjustments to a scanned silver gelatin print and a negative. Once you have a digital file, there is no difference, as you are just editing pixels.

  7. #67

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by stradibarrius View Post
    When I scan a negative to post on the web, how much manipulation do you feel is ethical?
    Ethical? I don't think it's a matter of ethics.

    Anyone in your audience who cares about "ethics" should already be aware that whatever they see on a computer monitor is nothing more than a compressed, digital representation of the analogue version anyway. I mean, a wet print and a digital copy exist in two entirely different mediums altogether. And, each medium has its respective strengths and limitations. You can make the two version "appear" similar, but they will never "actually" be the same in spite of how similar they look. Who could you really be "fooling" anyway? Anyone who is highly familiar with photographic techniques will normally know if you've heavily manipulated a photo.

    Spark notes: Apples will never be oranges, even though they're similar. So, don't sweat this.

    Quote Originally Posted by stradibarrius View Post
    When I shoot digital it is a different situation but when I shoot film I want the process to be analogue. But as we all know to share our film photography on line we have to scan a negative or a print.
    As it has been said, simply do the best you can to make it look as close to the final [wet] print as possible. Since very few people I know of do straight wet prints of their negatives (i.e., without any post production whatsoever), it would make sense to make some enhancements to the scan just as you normally would with film under an enlarger.

    Quote Originally Posted by stradibarrius View Post
    Some "sharpening" seems to be necessary maybe some contrast???
    What are your thoughts. Please accept this question in the spirit it is being asked.
    When I post here I want to show my analogue skills and not my PhotoShop skills.
    Sharpen if you want, but personally, I never find any sharpening "necessary" (not even when I'm using a DSLR either). I have full confidence in the native sharpness of all of my lenses and in my film scanner. And, IMHO, the more sharpening I see, the more "digital" it looks to me. I think Henry Cartier Bresson was on to something when he said, "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."
    Last edited by Brandon D.; 09-04-2010 at 01:25 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #68
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,816
    Some purists even include the rebate area of the negative in the print to show that their vision is so pure that no cropping is necessary. That is fine if photography is a performing art. However, if the ultimate goal is the best possible print, any manipulation and any printing method to achieve that should be permitted. In a forum like APUG, the restrictions others have cited above are appropriate.

  9. #69
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,225
    Quote Originally Posted by MaximusM3 View Post
    I guess you have a valid point and one which brings me to again re-evaluate the notion that anyone who does not have the resources, time, space, to establish a traditional darkroom workflow, should just stop shooting film, hang it up and call it a day...or go digital. Am I correct? .
    No, keep shooting film, there is a spin-off forum for that hybrid stuff. (Hybrid photo...)

  10. #70
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,128
    Quote Originally Posted by MaximusM3 View Post
    I guess you have a valid point and one which brings me to again re-evaluate the notion that anyone who does not have the resources, time, space, to establish a traditional darkroom workflow, should just stop shooting film, hang it up and call it a day...or go digital. Am I correct?
    No. I started developing the film and then scanning and printing with an ink jet.

    I did not like the costs, constant replacement of ink and the results were not that impressive. I looked at other printers. For me the break point was that I could buy an enlarger, lenses and a drum drier for less than another photo printer. But the real break point was not money but room. I had the space to dedicate a room to become a darkroom. That is the real expense of darkroom work.

    Steve
    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.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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