Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,550   Posts: 1,544,869   Online: 1049
      
Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 113
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    306
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
    Don

    What would you call my silver-gelatin FB print, which was contact printed from a silver-gelatin negative, which was made with an Agfa image-setter, using a digital file that came from my Nikon D70?
    Ralph:

    I'd have to classify it as a hybird. In my opinion you need to be working with a metalic salt from front to back. The D70 doesn't meet that criteria. The initial image is digital. And in my opinion, if photography doesn't start with a silver salt medium, then its something else. Digital simply is not the same.

    Tim: Call it rententive if you want. I'd probably classify it as purist.

    Regards,
    Don Sigl
    www.drs-fineartphoto.com

  2. #12
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,179
    Images
    6
    As long as I can't tell the difference between a print made from an in-camera negative and a print made from one of Ralph's drum scanned, digitally enlarged negatives, I couldn't care less how they're made.

    But if I can see the difference, I'll choose the process which yields the finer print no matter what you want to call it or how traitorous my gelatin silver friends think I'm being.

  3. #13
    jmailand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Belmont Michigan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    151
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by severian
    I think the time has come. B&W photography can now be classified as an alternative process along with platinum, cyanotype etc.

    Jack
    It may be your alternative but its not mine. I suspect others will agree with me.
    I have a digital camera, its makes very good 12M pixel photos, but the analog prints I make still look better to my eyes. Also until it is proven in the real world ,not some lab, that ink jet prints will really last for decades, digital will be my alternative process.

    James,

  4. #14
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,289
    Images
    20
    I think of "alternative" processes as handcoated processes. Silver may be moving that way, but it's not there yet to any great extent (the notable exception being Ron Mowrey's workshop). As far as I am concerned, as long as it's being made in factories, it's not alternative.

    (Centennial POP, you ask? Well there are always grey areas.)
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  5. #15
    smieglitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,863
    Images
    97
    I think the labeling issue is lost. I strolled through the 2006 invitational Area Show at the local Art institute and saw only about 1/6 of 3 dozen or so photographically-derived images labeled as to the proper print medium. About 4 of those were gelatin silverprints or van dyke brownprints, and a couple prints were labeled as "inkjet". There was 1 "giclee" and most were simply labeled "photograph" although those prints were almost exclusively inkjet prints with a couple c-prints mixed in. A couple "pigment prints" slipped in there which was disturbing as they were obvious inkjet prints. Wish the computer component would have been acknowledged there as I think that practice is deceptive while the term "photograph" is probably too broad to imply any deception in the current climate. I see the latter increasingly as more a case of ignorance rather than deception.

    But, forget about differentiating between an in-camera or digital negative or prints from them respectively, a silver light sensor or a silicon one, or any intermediate step done digitally. Only the more knowledgable collectors or fellow practitioners will care enough to ask or consider the difference important enough. I think that is unfortunate but it seems the way things have become. The best we will be able to do is refer to the proper specific and final medium in such situations. Eventually the audience will (hopefully) question why some things are generically labelled "photograph" and are scattered among the silverprints, platinum prints, chromogenic prints and ambrotypes, etc., and for that matter, the well-executed inkjet prints.

    Joe

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Eastern, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,020
    Images
    55
    perhaps we need to recognise the difference between a print and a photograph

    ultimately the image and the creator's intent is the important thing

    a weak image in a 'great/new/old/alternative/silver/digital/stick dipped in tar/expensive/whatever' medium is still a weak image

    the medium does not define quality/message/intent

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
    Don

    What would you call my silver-gelatin FB print, which was contact printed from a silver-gelatin negative, which was made with an Agfa image-setter, using a digital file that came from my Nikon D70?
    Digital print... It is what it is.

    A Traditional silver gelatin print, is a print that uses no digital whatsoever to create it from start to finish including the negative being of film and not digital.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    552
    Quote Originally Posted by kjsphoto
    Digital print... It is what it is.

    A Traditional silver gelatin print, is a print that uses no digital whatsoever to create it from start to finish including the negative being of film and not digital.
    and both are photographs?

  9. #19
    bjorke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    SF & Surrounding Planet
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,032
    Images
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht
    What would you call my silver-gelatin FB print, which was contact printed from a silver-gelatin negative, which was made with an Agfa image-setter, using a digital file that came from my Nikon D70?
    I guess that would depend on whether it was any good or not.

    "What Would Zeus Do?"
    KBPhotoRantPhotoPermitAPUG flickr Robot

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by tim atherton
    and both are photographs?
    No.

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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