Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,497   Posts: 1,543,057   Online: 933
      
Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 115
  1. #71
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkroom317 View Post
    Tim Ernst during a lecture in 2010 said that Kodak had just killed Kodachrome and how happy he was when he stopped shooting that "awful" film.
    Film : Awful :: Digital : Lazy

    What? Does he want somebody to wipe his butt when he goes to the bathroom, too?

    To be serious, there is a certain amount of work overhead in any task you do, from getting up in the morning to, yes, going to the bathroom. That is life.

    Yes, I like the convenience of shooting digital pictures but convenience should not equate to "avoidance of work."

    Developing film and all of the other chores involved in traditional photography can, sometimes, be boring and tedious but, if film is your choice you have to accept that.

    Personally, I find recharging batteries and downloading data from flash cards to be tedious and boring. And, YES, when I shoot digital, I probably spend as much time recharging batteries, hooking up cables, downloading files and editing them as I spend developing and proofing in the darkroom. Much as I don't like it, I accept that as part of the work I have to do in order to shoot digital pictures.

    When somebody says film is "awful" or when I hear people reminisce about how they took a photography course in college where they had to D-E-V-E-L-O-P their F-I-L-M it says to me that they don't understand their craft and that they are either too lazy or too stupid to try to understand it.
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/randystankey/

  2. #72

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    593
    The darkroom is a pleasure but loading hundreds of images off a card, sorting them and then editing them is a chore. I have dozens of files that I haven't sorted. I just load the entire card into a older no matter what the images are of. I truly dread working with my commuter on photos mainly organization issues and disappointment with some inkjet prints. Yet, I don't mind spending 11 hours in the darkroom like I did yesterday.
    Bachelor of Fine Arts and Bachelor of Arts: Journalism - University of Arkansas 2014

    Canon A-1, Canon AE-1, Canon Canonet GIII 17, Argus 21, Rolleicord Va, Mamiya RB67, Voigtländer Bessa

    http://darkroom317.deviantart.com/

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Central Illinois
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    742
    You're not the only one that doesn't like organizing digital photos. I do the same thing - download the photos from the camera to the computer in a folder with starting and ending dates, and organize later. I much prefer putting the slides into a tray, then setting up screen and projector and turning off the lights.

    The Slide Curmudgeon
    ME Super

    Shoot more film.
    There are eight ways to put a slide into a projector tray. Seven of them are wrong.

  4. #74
    mikendawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    57
    I prefer to shoot film. A co-worker said I should throw away one of my MUCH older cameras (a Kalimar A "Welmy 2") because it was not digital, and said.. "It's garbage!"...
    I kindly pointed out that I can do much more with a film image than you can with a digital image. Sure, digital is easy, convenient and clinical. But that's the problem. I mean, when you have a camera that can take a photo, instantly show the results (much to the demise of Polaroid) and let the "Faux-Tographer" see what DoF they got without having to think about it? yeah... that's just laziness..
    I take a look at the Av mark on my lens, and figure out. Okay, the subject is currently 10' away... I need it sharp, but what if it moves forward a bit, or backwards a bit?? (animal or person).. well, I peek at the DoF scale on the lens (ask a digital photographer if they even KNOW what one of those are) and figure out..okay, I've got 3 feet to play with either way.. GREAT!
    Take the photo...

    If it's stationary and I want a full separation, well, just adjust the aperture to get the result.. I know how to do this with film, why the hell wouldn't I know how to apply it to my EOS 40D or 1000D??

    Heck, I have taken shallow DoF shots with a 2003 POS P&S camera that doesn't have autofocus. It's, literally, a semi-smart box camera. It'll adjust the shutter speed and "aperture" to shoot, but to get close focusing? yeah, flip a switch to MOVE the sensor in or out from the lens.
    2.1MP fun...

    Next time someone figures you can't use a digital camera, just ask them.. "can you read a DoF scale?"

    Cheers

    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    APS, 35mm, 120, 4x5 and a Deardorff & Sons 8x10 under restoration.

    I don't care the format, as long as it's film!

  5. #75

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Alamo City, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,256
    Depth of field? That hasn't existed since the stone ages. Modern technology has eliminated such mundane things.

  6. #76
    John Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern Forest Region, Western Australia
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    520
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Worker 11811 View Post
    Film : Awful :: Digital : Lazy


    When somebody says film is "awful" or when I hear people reminisce about how they took a photography course in college where they had to D-E-V-E-L-O-P their F-I-L-M it says to me that they don't understand their craft and that they are either too lazy or too stupid to try to understand it.
    If you go to the original quote, as you quoted it, it said that the whoever it was that said it said Kodachrome was awful, not film in general, and if he or she did not like Kodachrome that is not reason to burn him or her at the stake of narrow reading

    John

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    965
    Images
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by mikendawn View Post
    I mean, when you have a camera that can take a photo, instantly show the results (much to the demise of Polaroid) and let the "Faux-Tographer" see what DoF they got without having to think about it? yeah... that's just laziness..
    So, then do you think someone who uses a Polaroid camera is lazy? Or an instamatic? Or a fully-auto-everything film camera? Or a disposable drug-store camera? Digital didn't make people lazy. Most of the cameras ever sold have been simple push-button boxes, for the simple reason that they were easy to use.

  8. #78
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,882
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    roger

    people say+do dopy things on both sides of the street ...
    (and you can read it here on apug or anywhere else )
    THAT is what i am talking about .
    Fine. But I'm specifically referring to your apparent criticism of darkroom workers discarding solutions down the drain. The vast majority of them are perfectly save to dispose of that way.

  9. #79
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    Digital, instant photos or automatic cameras don't make people lazy but lazy people use them to avoid work.

    Sometimes, I'm just hungry and want to eat or I might not have time to cook a meal so I'll take a frozen dinner out of the microwave oven and have my meal in 3:00. That, by itself, does not make me lazy.

    It doesn't take much effort to dump some fresh veggies, some chicken, some water and some spices into a pot and make soup. It's not as convenient and it takes longer but you'll have a much tastier and healthier product than if you microwaved a cup of Lipton soup mix.

    Furthermore, you get to pick your ingredients, you get to spice the soup the way you want, you can make your soup just the way you like it and you'll have a tasy, wholesome product that the whole family can sit down and enjoy.

    Okay... On some days, you're tired, you're grumpy from a long day of work, and the kids are screaming for dinner... You just microwave a frozen pizza and be done with it. No harm, no foul. But, if you're feeding your kids microwave pizza for dinner every night because you don't want to figure out how to read a recipe book, YOU'RE LAZY.

    The analogy applies to digital in the same way. Sometimes I just need a picture right now. Sometimes my boss wants me to e-mail my proofs to the printer by 4:30. Sometimes I'm just going to send the picture to somebody on the internet or just post it on Facebook. Sometimes, I don't want to develop a whole roll of film for a one-off. I'll shoot digital and I won't feel guilty but if I'm shooting digital every day just because I don't want to develop film, YES! I'M LAZY.

    Cameras are tools and each tool is meant to do a certain job. Screwdrivers are for fastening screws. Hammers are for driving nails. You wouldn't fasten a screw with a hammer any more than you'd cook chicken soup in the microwave or try to take a good photograph with a point-and-shoot digicam.

    A good carpenter needs to know how to use his hammers and screwdrivers properly. A good cook needs to know how to use his cookware and his ingredients properly. A good photographer should know how to use his cameras properly but it doesn't matter whether those cameras are digital or film. He still needs to know how to use them properly. Anything else is just laziness.
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/randystankey/

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,272
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Fine. But I'm specifically referring to your apparent criticism of darkroom workers discarding solutions down the drain. The vast majority of them are perfectly save to dispose of that way.
    metol, HQ and silver rich fixer, as well as a variety of toners that the average darkroom worker uses are not perfectly safe for discarding that way.
    and it doesn't matter whether you are a small or large quantity generator, if you are unsure where you live what the proper thing to do is
    contact your local authorities ... in the end, if a film photographer suggests his waste is a drop in a bucket
    ..... 1000s of people make this claim, and 1000 drops in a bucket is a whole bucket.

    this thread isn't about chemical based photographers being responsible with their waste, but about misconceptions and dopy things that
    people who use digital or use film say in order to boost their own egos and feel better about whatever type of photography they do.
    and most of what film and digital people say about eachother is BS ...
    Last edited by jnanian; 03-25-2012 at 10:13 PM. Click to view previous post history.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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