Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,727   Posts: 1,515,173   Online: 976
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 48
  1. #21
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,579
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesDean View Post
    No arguments here, just an attempt at jocularity. I'm a new comer here so still finding my feet.

    Pointing the OP to DPUG is helpful if it helps him find the answer to his question. Repeating the pointer again and again makes this group appear less friendly than I give it credit for. Whilst some people may believe that APUG is only about exposure and chemistry, I enjoy it for discussions about aesthetics, morality, legality, locations, culture, people and humour (and I can do all of this whilst calling myself an analogue photographer). I hope I've come to the right place...
    I'm slow in catching humor so I missed that.

    APUG is a great place to learn all kinds of things.

    Glad to have you and Stoogley here.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  2. #22
    Ken N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Creston and Newton, Iowa.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    389
    Images
    8
    The OP's question does bring up a good subject--one of which is directly related to APUG criteria. How does the Zone System fit in the 21st Century? The reality is, this is a critical issue and the scanning part of his question became noise in the discussion.

    A scanner is effectively a very limited version of enlarging paper, except you have no ability to dodge and burn during the scan itself. Also, the scanner, unlike paper emulsion, has no effective toe or shoulder. Learning how to optimize to the hard limits a scanner has is where applying the Zone System is welcome.

    But what does this have to do with APUG? Several things come to mind:

    1. The same techniques used to calibrate the scanner is the same techniques used to calibrate normal paper. Very very few of us use just one film and one paper. I ask this question: When is the discussion of techniques that improve our ANALOG process ever off-limits? Some people believe that once done, that there is no reason to ever explore using it again. If that's the case, why don't we just always use the same settings we've used for 75 years?

    2. Some of us use the digital realm for image experimentation. We scan the negative to figure out what we want to do with it or figure out a way to handle a complex dodge, burn or gamma adjustment. 20 minutes in the computer and I've got a guide print from the computer to use in the darkroom for the final print on very expensive fiber paper.

    Finally, there is an issue with DPUG. It's getting a little better, but the culture over there is not like it is here. Where we are open to discussing a rehashed topic over and over again. Makes sense, really, since nothing is really new in decades. But over at DPUG, you ask a question like this and you'll get two answers. Use the stinking "search button" or "buy the book".

    But that's life as we know it. We had to split the forums a few years ago to stop the warfare.
    http://www.zone-10.com

    When you turn your camera on, does it return the favor?

  3. #23
    Bob Carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto-Ontario
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    4,595
    Images
    14
    Dpug or hybrid was formed because the name APUG suggests Analogue and the owner of this site wanted and still wants to keep it that way, analoque discussion only, I am ok with this and participate on both sites.

    I do not remember the war's you are speaking of.

  4. #24
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19
    Wouldn't refer to them as wars. But there have been some rather heated discussions on this topic in the past. The things to realize here is that all are welcome, that there is a scope of discussion that is appropriate for this forum, and that nothing personal should be taken be remarks guiding you in a different direction on This SUBJECT ALONE.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  5. #25
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,411
    Images
    2
    I'm starting a new campaign as of right now; advertised by my signature. If you love APUG, but own a scanner, you should sign on to DPUG at the same time as APUG. Myself included...
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

  6. #26
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,579
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken N View Post
    The OP's question does bring up a good subject--one of which is directly related to APUG criteria. How does the Zone System fit in the 21st Century? The reality is, this is a critical issue and the scanning part of his question became noise in the discussion.
    I agree that scanning is important in relation to film's survival and a significant part of how many of us use film.

    For paying work, weddings etcetera, my work is scanned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken N View Post
    A scanner is effectively a very limited version of enlarging paper, except you have no ability to dodge and burn during the scan itself. Also, the scanner, unlike paper emulsion, has no effective toe or shoulder. Learning how to optimize to the hard limits a scanner has is where applying the Zone System is welcome.
    I do agree that zone system principles can be applied to digital tools but there are so many variables that a general discussion of that zoning to scan borders upon meaninglessness. Switching scanners is like switching paper. Switching software adds another layer of possibilities.

    Scanning, to be blunt, is simply a specialized version of digital photography. That is not an insult, it simply is what it is, and it requires a "slightly" different set of skills and tools than the traditional materials and processes APUG specializes in.

    APUG also isn't a "film site" per se.
    APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes. We are an active photographic community; our forums contain a highly detailed archive of traditional and historic photographic processes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken N View Post
    But what does this have to do with APUG? Several things come to mind:

    1. The same techniques used to calibrate the scanner is the same techniques used to calibrate normal paper. Very very few of us use just one film and one paper. I ask this question: When is the discussion of techniques that improve our ANALOG process ever off-limits? Some people believe that once done, that there is no reason to ever explore using it again. If that's the case, why don't we just always use the same settings we've used for 75 years?

    2. Some of us use the digital realm for image experimentation. We scan the negative to figure out what we want to do with it or figure out a way to handle a complex dodge, burn or gamma adjustment. 20 minutes in the computer and I've got a guide print from the computer to use in the darkroom for the final print on very expensive fiber paper.
    I have nothing against people experimenting with digital. But, how does digital experimentation improve my skills in traditional and historic processing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken N View Post
    Finally, there is an issue with DPUG. It's getting a little better, but the culture over there is not like it is here. Where we are open to discussing a rehashed topic over and over again. Makes sense, really, since nothing is really new in decades. But over at DPUG, you ask a question like this and you'll get two answers. Use the stinking "search button" or "buy the book".
    The other problem I see with DPUG is that, to this point, it is neither truly unique in theme, nor necessarily the best place to get info. NAPP's community is such a huge resource for the pittance of $100/year that that I can hardly imagine why anybody with PS bothers with any other forum for their digital questions , including on scanning.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  7. #27
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,102
    Images
    46
    I feel like in my quiet way I didn't make my point clear -- much of this thread talks of making negatives good for scanning.

    I'm recommending making the negatives good for analog - using the scanner only as a densitometer.

    Kind of like the old instructions telling us how to turn a spotmeter into a densitometer.

    Now you can use a scanner as a densitometer to read your densities. Then take those numbers to the darkroom. Adjust your film development time so the next negative better fits your silver gelatin paper.

    The negative will not be optimized for scanning.

  8. #28
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,411
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    I feel like in my quiet way I didn't make my point clear -- much of this thread talks of making negatives good for scanning.

    I'm recommending making the negatives good for analog - using the scanner only as a densitometer.

    Kind of like the old instructions telling us how to turn a spotmeter into a densitometer.

    Now you can use a scanner as a densitometer to read your densities. Then take those numbers to the darkroom. Adjust your film development time so the next negative better fits your silver gelatin paper.

    The negative will not be optimized for scanning.
    In this light, how is a scanner any different than a densitometer? (that's a rhetorical question)

    I'm impressed by the posters that answer the OP with a thoughtful & useful response. Any parrot can tout the company line, but to approach an inquiry that brings up digital from an analog perspective is a much more constructive way to keep the discussion APUG appropriate.

    That's my opinion.
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

  9. #29
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,102
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by holmburgers View Post
    In this light, how is a scanner any different than a densitometer.
    It's no different at all.

    Since the OP has a scanner, there's no need to go out and buy a densitometer.

    I think when how-to books were being written, nobody thought scanners would be readily available to hobbyists. Of course they didn't think densitometers would be easy to come by either.

    Well, I guess in some senses a scanner is better...

    It is almost like a microdensitometer. Don't know if it's good enough for edge effect studies, but you could read very small areas.

    It's also nice that you don't risk scratching the negative by touching it with the reading head like you do with a regular densitometer.

    But on the con side, it is a pain having to load the negative in a carrier, and go through the motions of scanning. A densitometer is more convenient in that respect.

  10. #30
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,411
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    It's no different at all.
    With that in mind, I think that discussing the ability of a scanner to act as a densitometer should be fair game.

    Any argument against it would ultimately be rooted in stubbornness, and an irrational fear that allowing such words as "Photoshop" & "scanner" to be used on APUG would somehow erode its integrity.

    APUG's mission is to be a place for the discussion of completely analog photography processes, but there is nothing explicitly stated that bars us from talking about digital computation, or using digital diagnostic devices. There are a number of cameras, light meters & other devices that we as film users utilize that would fall into this category.

    Sorry to keep pushing this issue, but I think that this thread touched on an interesting gray area that at first glance appears off topic, but is fundamentally in tune with the purpose & intent of the Analog Photography Users Group.
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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