Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,940   Posts: 1,557,448   Online: 865
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 34 of 34
  1. #31
    Mateo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Hollister, Ca
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    494
    Images
    16
    "I'm interested in what you think makes a photographic wet darkroom made color print superior to a LightJet print, and how they are quantifiably superior"

    Chunky looking high values.

  2. #32
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Mateo
    "I'm interested in what you think makes a photographic wet darkroom made color print superior to a LightJet print, and how they are quantifiably superior"

    Chunky looking high values.
    Steve, Mateo

    I said:
    A lambda/lightjet prints are often close.

    I should also add (as I've said in another thread) that they can exceed a traditionally made print on mural enlargements or enlargements that will require high multipliers.

    They are also superior when manipulation to the neg is required that can only be done digitally. This should be taken as a given.

    The long and short of why they are close but not as good is resolution and the limitations of the files sent to them.

    The current batch of LJ's and lambdas print digital files at a res of 300 to 400 dpi and use digital files. A traditional c-print has marginally higher 'res' on normal stock (not all that perceptible) and perceptibly higher on glossy and flex 'papers' (fujiflex, duraflex). The digital files do not contain the breadth of colour of a neg.

    These are the quantifiable issues. Especially for me. I print highly saturated images on to gloss, high gloss and flex materials.

    The statement referred to me and my preferences and those items that I know to be true.

    It is all fine and well to enjoy the ability to produce whatever it is *you* wish to , using what ever process on what ever materials. I have the option to use digital or traditional. I choose traditional in almost all instances, because it is more natural, and quantifiable superior in the areas most important to me.

    If my requirements involved intense dodging and burning, as well as things not available in the darkroom (e.g. sharpening, perspective control, or even making it look like natural media) than I might say that digital was quantifiable superior in the areas most important to me.

    jdc

    FWIW: I work with and follow the industry as a matter of employment. I have setup and used a lightJet 2080 which was built to burn film and had the capability to burn paper at its lowest res. This was and is still the best digital printer I have ever used.

    *

  3. #33
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    I should also add that I am not mel gibson (even though my avatar thinks he is) standing, face painted, spear in hand ready to fight the onslaught of digital until the last drop of blood falls from my veins.

    Here is what i posted in another thread

    Quote Originally Posted by me
    I spend 3 days a week doing digital imaging, networking, and general IS.

    I started working with computers professionally in the mid 80's. The promise they held for an artist was exhilarating. after 20 years of progress, with equal doses of gratification and manipulation as administered by the hardware and software companies has left me very cynical. I am fully from Missouri when it comes to all things computers.
    I am very skeptical of the hype surrounding digital. From a real world perspective -- as in using the stuff daily for 20 years -- it is not as advertised.

    Meanwhile, I am one of those people who loves the life cycle of photography. From choosing the correct film through exposure, souping, enlarging and viewing. I find grain and the characteristics of film beautiful. The process is natural, intuitive and fulfilling.

    Others, less jaded than I, might feel differently.

    *

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    701
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean
    I must have a very rare outlook on photography. I have a deep emotional connection to the scene and am compelled to use real materials to capture the light from it. Sometimes it feels impossible to express why I find this so important, I just can't seem to make some people understand. I 'feel' the light lives on in the film and print, a moment in time that I experienced is still there, burned into the film, and the film itself produces the print. Once computers do their thing, what was once there and somewhat real to me, no longer exists. It may appear to be the same thing but it's been completely changed. If you love photography, and love experiencing a real moment of light and time, I can't relate to that moment being altered out of existence as soon as digital manipulates it into something else. I almost find it tragic.
    Too me there's something far more personal about connecting through the camera to create the image. There's something very satisfying in seeing something, finding the right light, composing the image - were I able to have a darkroom I am certain I would enjoy that end as well.

    To me that connection is lost in using digital tools to manipulate, enhance, and/or alter the image. Once the connection is gone the emotion dries up and the image loses meaning.

    I think digital art is stunning but I don't enjoy it as much something crafted with natural mediums. You can create textures but they don't stir the same emotions in me. It all seems so uniform, too tightly controlled. All the natural mediums, they are not uniform, they do not apply uniformly. There's subtle variances in their application, variances that I have not seen applied to digital works, variances that only add to the finished piece.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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