Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,849   Posts: 1,582,837   Online: 721
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50
  1. #11
    Alex Hawley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,895
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Noah Huber
    ...oh gosh. . then there are Fresson prints, offset prints... gum prints.. um.. . this really does go on and on...
    I think you answered your own question Noah. There is no end of it. You are right about another point-there are people who make a living at this. They make a living at it because it is never-ending and there is a never-ending demand for "expert" interpretations and "code wizards". Why do I know about this? Because I deal with it first-hand every day and have been doing so for 25 years.

    Museum curators have to categorize things. That's why they like standards so well. Makes their life easy. But guess what? Every once in a while, something comes along that doesn't quite fit into the existing buckets. That sparks a controversy as to which "bucket" is the "correct" bucket. Enter the code wizards to make the call or create a new bucket. How long does it take to do that and get everyone's buy-in? YEARS!
    Semper Fi & God Bless America
    My Photography Blog

  2. #12
    dsisaacs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    N.E. Colorado
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    38
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Sukach

    First, let us categorize the initial capture:

    1. FILM. A work from a straight negative, exposed in a conventional camera, with primarily mechanical attributes. The image has been exposed to a light-sensitive chemical emulsion, en bloc one or more times, and will be completed by chemical action, and none other.

    2. HYBRID. An image captured on film, and further modified by computer processing. A film negative scanned and modified by any computer aided methods, for contrast, or spotting or in any other way for enhancement will be considered Hybrid.

    3. DIGITAL. An image captured on a light-sensitive electronic array will be described as a "Digital" image - even though a transparent negative may be produced and printed by conventional methods and processed chemically.
    Rather than "Film" which would exclude images on glass plates, paper negatives, polaroids, deguerotypes, tin types, etc.

    I think "CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL" works better it isn't neccesarily "dated" or "antiquated" and it will for most people define the process as "an image taken, processed, and printed without: "digital process, enhancement or modification"

    It will always be easier to define what "CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL" means by specifying what it is not. Most people at least for the next several years already have somewhat of an understanding of what non-digital photography is. It is the blurring of digital and "CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL" nomenclature that is what we need to work on.

    Thus FWIW:
    1. CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL EXPOSURE. A photographic image captured by a light sensitive chemical emulsion and processed with chemical action resulting in a visible image.

    2. DIGITAL EXPOSURE. A photographic image captured by a light sensitive electronic device and captured in a digital format.

    -----------------------------
    as for intermediate processing
    -----------------------------
    how about "DIGITALLY ENHANCED OR DIGITALLY MODIFIED"
    -----------------------------

    As I am thinking this out it occurs to me that this could get very complicated.

    So then we could end up with a label such as this:

    Dog #7
    Limited Edition 1 of 37
    Digital Inkjet Print from a Digital Montage of Digital Exposures, Digitally Enhanced Classical Exposures, and Classical Exposures.

    Somehow I don't think we are going to get much cooperation for this much detail.

    It will be labeled:
    Dog #7
    Silver Giclee Print
    LOL

    Hmmm, trying to think outside the box. A bit of a quagmire.
    What is "Art"? Art is what I decide it is!

  3. #13
    hortense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Riverside, CA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    612
    Images
    5
    You got to be kidding!
    [FONT=Times New Roman]MAC[/FONT]

  4. #14
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by hortense
    You got to be kidding!
    Hortense,

    I think it's a Python skit, but I don't recognize it yet.

    Lee

    "Nevertheless, I must warn you that in future you should delete the words 'crunchy frog', and replace them with the legend, 'crunchy raw unboned real dead frog' if you want to avoid prosecution." - Monty Python

    ( a little joke folks, carry on.)

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    696
    Images
    21
    Can this be moved to The Soapbox? I'm working really hard at stopping myself from posting an acerbic response.
    Graeme Hird
    www.scenebyhird.com

    Failure is NOT an option! It comes bundled with your software ....

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Graeme Hird
    Can this be moved to The Soapbox? I'm working really hard at stopping myself from posting an acerbic response.
    My thought also.
    There's no use in creating defenitions that exclude future creativity.

    G

  7. #17
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by bobfowler
    OK, here's a sticky point about wet-process color prints...
    Many labs (mini and otherwise) that produce "wet process" color prints are actually printing digitally.
    Many, if not most, commercial labs are now using printing systems such as these because they CAN handle digital as well as film. Does the intermediate digital step make this a hybrid? I like to differentiate between "Machine Prints" and "Custom Hand Printing", but most of the labs in my area now are doing everything with machines such as the D-lab2.
    I'm probably just pissing up a rope...
    I would say that it does make these prints "Hybrids".
    There is no question in my mind that in all this there is sequential scanning, and most probably some sort of "automatic digital processing". I can't see a substantial difference between that and tossing an image into PhotoShop, and hitting "Fix Everything Automatically."

    Discussions here, of whatever flavor, will never be labeled "Pissing up a rope."
    Each and EVERY thought is "good".
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  8. #18
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    So what about something like what used to be printed on music CDs?

    AAA = Analog recording, analog copy to analog media, through
    ADA = Analog recording, digitally output to analog media (lightjet),
    ADD = film - scan - inkjet
    DAA would be digital recording output to film and then analog copy to analog media,
    DDD then an inkjet print from digital capture?

    It might be difficult to do an AAD, though...
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  9. #19
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by dsisaacs
    Rather than "Film" which would exclude images on glass plates, paper negatives, polaroids, deguerotypes, tin types, etc.
    Good point. I've been struggling with semantics here. "Film" seems to carry with it the idea of a flexible backing, which was not intended. I was thinking of the light sensitive layer (film as a thin coating). "Negative" should definitely be out.

    I think "CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL" works better it isn't neccesarily "dated" or "antiquated" and it will for most people define the proces or modification"
    It will always be easier to define what "CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL" means by specifying what it is not. Most people at least for the next several years already have somewhat of an understanding of what non-digital photography is. It is the blurring of digital and "CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL" nomenclature that is what we need to work on.
    Tough calls here. To me "Classical" is more of an aesthetic term ... linked to well-established art: "A CLASSIC Greek statue". "Tradition" indicates something passed down through generations. Either are "not bad" ... but I think we should zero in on terms less susceptable to interpretation.

    I was trying to avoid using "Analog". The more I think of it, the less I am sure of why I tried to avoid it.

    Thus FWIW:
    1. CLASSICAL or TRADITIONAL EXPOSURE. A photographic image captured by a light sensitive chemical emulsion and processed with chemical action resulting in a visible image.
    How about substituting:

    1. ANALOG EXPOSURE. A photographic image captured by a light sensitive chemical emulsion and processed with chemical action resulting in a visible image.

    - Or in reading this, "Exposure" is common to both. do you think it might be deleted from both?

    2. DIGITAL EXPOSURE. A photographic image captured by a light sensitive electronic device and captured in a digital format.

    As I am thinking this out it occurs to me that this could get very complicated.
    True. That is the hard part - keeping it simple and concise.

    So then we could end up with a label such as this:

    Dog #7
    Limited Edition 1 of 37
    Digital Inkjet Print from a Digital Montage of Digital Exposures, Digitally Enhanced Classical Exposures, and Classical Exposures.
    Somehow I don't think we are going to get much cooperation for this much detail.
    I agree.

    What about the form: "Digital/ Ink Jet Print."

    Or, in another case: "Analog - Silver Gelatin Print" - linking to the "Silver Gelatin Print" definition.

    Hmmm, trying to think outside the box. A bit of a quagmire.
    Again, I agree.
    I just finished making two (2) Silver Gelatin Prints. Analog images, both enlarged on silver gelatin paper and chemically processed. Trying to satisfy my own aesthetic demands -- that meant five (5) Test Strips, eight (8) 8"' x 10" Evaluation prints and nine (9) Almost there, but not quite "16 x 20"s.
    All that for two (2) 16" x 20" Silver Gelatin "Exhibition" prints.

    That is the real difference between "analog" and "digital" -- but how to describe that in three words or less..?
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  10. #20
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce (Camclicker)
    Ed,
    Not an argument in any way but an honest question for my own understanding:
    "2. HYBRID. An image captured on film, and further modified by computer processing. A film negative scanned and modified by any computer aided methods, for contrast, or spotting or in any other way for enhancement will be considered Hybrid. "
    How does the image captured by camera and film, processed in wet chemistry and printed via enlarger on Silver Gelatin paper AND THEN scanned and tweaked for internet gallery showing fit in. Does this meet the standards of Hybrid or is something yet to be decided.
    I'm only asking, not challenging.
    "Arguments" (in the best sense - NOT heated) are OK .. So is "Challenging". Just argue about, and challenge ideas, not people or their principles.

    I think the mission here is to define the finished work itself, not the image on a computer screen somewhere. I would understand a digitally transmitted image to have undergone scanning and transmission. The ORIGINAL image description, "Analog/ Silver Gelatin PRINT", would not be affected.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

Page 2 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