Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,295   Posts: 1,535,659   Online: 1118
      
Page 10 of 22 FirstFirst ... 4567891011121314151620 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 214
  1. #91
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,414
    Images
    207
    I know you're not schizo. Hence, the smiley...
    There are ways to print without needing a full darkroom. Cyanotypes would be a good alternative place to start. You're producing 4x5 negatives, which would be a good size. 6x6, and 6x9, contacts can have a gem-like quality.

  2. #92
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,244
    Images
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Anyway, I totally agree that I should be printing optically, and I have all the stuff the only thing I don't have is probably some paper and some developer, but I have everything else that I could ever need to develop and print properly ... Except the darkroom space... And yes I could in theory going to my bathroom at night try to shut off all lights of block out the windows, do a contact print, and hope to expose it and developing properly, but for me going to the process of doing something like that and not really coming out with a quality product is it really useful, to me that's a waste of time because I wouldn't really be able to perfect anything, and by the time that I actually got to setting up a real dark room and printing again for real, to print something nice that was actually usable, I would have forgotten basically everything that I learned in my bathroom anyway and so I just don't want to waste the time, when I have so many other things going on in my life.
    (underlining by me, for clarity).

    Stone,

    This is going to be my very last response to this thread. You are wasting time right now trying to understand something that is of much less importance to your photography than just simply doing more photography.

    You are doing yourself a huge disfavor to try to accomplish something by leaning too much on the qualities of the film and developer you use.

    Is it NOT clear by now, reading all of the responses of fellow photographers here, PLUS the fact that most photography books don't have the information you asked about in the first place, that it isn't something that will make or break a photographer?

    I just don't understand why this is so important to you. You just went through a long rigmarole trying to figure out whether TMax 400, Tri-X 320, or HP5+ is what you want to use. And then immediately after that long thread is finished, you start this one and another one about using Tech Pan?! It's like a gigantic mystery to me and you are all over the place. If you take the time to really learn just ONE of the films you have questions about and flail around trying out, then the choice of film will gradually become less and less important, because you will see with your own eyes that it is your skill that determines the outcome of your photographs, not the stupid film. Just be patient and buy nothing but one film for a long time and try to work on the other much more important aspects of photography.

    Film has no ability to think or act, but YOU do. You create something that is a reflection of what it is you want to show. What is it you actually do want to show us with your photography? What do you want us to experience and feel? What do you want us to take away from watching your photographs?
    I think of the photographs you have posted in the gallery over the period in time you've been on APUG, and the only thing I can really remember is the fact that you want MUCH more contrast from your photographs than I do, that you titled many of your photographs by what film you used, and that you used a very handsome lady's bottom to draw attention to one of your cameras. I'm not saying that to be mean, it's just me speaking my mind. I can't remember a single other thing.
    In the same breath I will say I remember other photographs from members long gone, posted to the gallery years ago, because how beautifully crafted they were. And I don't remember a single thing about them regarding what film was used.

    If you want to perfect anything, as you mentioned yourself above about darkroom printing, spend much less time with learning about materials, and much more time learning about the art. Make good art! Wise words by Neil Gaiman that everybody should embrace.

    Peace.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  3. #93

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    (underlining by me, for clarity).

    Stone,

    This is going to be my very last response to this thread. You are wasting time right now trying to understand something that is of much less importance to your photography than just simply doing more photography.

    You are doing yourself a huge disfavor to try to accomplish something by leaning too much on the qualities of the film and developer you use.

    Is it NOT clear by now, reading all of the responses of fellow photographers here, PLUS the fact that most photography books don't have the information you asked about in the first place, that it isn't something that will make or break a photographer?

    I just don't understand why this is so important to you. You just went through a long rigmarole trying to figure out whether TMax 400, Tri-X 320, or HP5+ is what you want to use. And then immediately after that long thread is finished, you start this one and another one about using Tech Pan?! It's like a gigantic mystery to me and you are all over the place. If you take the time to really learn just ONE of the films you have questions about and flail around trying out, then the choice of film will gradually become less and less important, because you will see with your own eyes that it is your skill that determines the outcome of your photographs, not the stupid film. Just be patient and buy nothing but one film for a long time and try to work on the other much more important aspects of photography.

    Film has no ability to think or act, but YOU do. You create something that is a reflection of what it is you want to show. What is it you actually do want to show us with your photography? What do you want us to experience and feel? What do you want us to take away from watching your photographs?
    I think of the photographs you have posted in the gallery over the period in time you've been on APUG, and the only thing I can really remember is the fact that you want MUCH more contrast from your photographs than I do, that you titled many of your photographs by what film you used, and that you used a very handsome lady's bottom to draw attention to one of your cameras. I'm not saying that to be mean, it's just me speaking my mind. I can't remember a single other thing.
    In the same breath I will say I remember other photographs from members long gone, posted to the gallery years ago, because how beautifully crafted they were. And I don't remember a single thing about them regarding what film was used.

    If you want to perfect anything, as you mentioned yourself above about darkroom printing, spend much less time with learning about materials, and much more time learning about the art. Make good art! Wise words by Neil Gaiman that everybody should embrace.

    Peace.
    Fair enough, I still do focus on other things, I just happened to be curious because I was in a bookstore and none of the books had any information on the film. It's not like I run around staring at photo books in stores all day long for weeks at a time struggling to figure out what was shot on what, but it's still good to know, certainly in these galleries most people list the information on what they shot what camera what developer what paper what paper developer etc. there's a reason that those categories are listed as options to fill in, it's because they are relevant. To a degree...

    As far as being all over the place, once I came back to film in 2010/2011 I wanted to experience all of the different films that everyone talked about that were so amazing, but of course wanted to be sure that I was getting results that were similar to what they were getting, some of these were either films that were not stored properly or were developers that were not readily available, and so I kept the films frozen and safe, as best I could, and then finally acquired some of the proper an official original developers etc. to try with them, then I spent A lot of time understanding and learning my own process and perfecting my development techniques etc. so that I wasn't just fumbling in the dark. Now I have all this text and that is in good shape, not fog in anyway shape or form, and tech pan developer specifically just so I can see "what all the fuss is about" just like with other things that other people say like how plus X is so amazing, of all the films I've tested that people talked about were amazing or not amazing etc. etc. the only films I've really found to be of any interest to me was Verichrome Pan and Panatomic-X...

    Even the tech pan doesn't seem to really be all it's cracked up to be when developed on low contrast, however I do like it as a high contrast film which is it's other purpose/option.

    So now I've learned something. A look that I like that wasn't readily available, know that I know that this look is achievable with some films, I can look for those characteristics in other films that exist currently. Now I have a basis for understanding and finding something that I truly like in what is available now but I wouldn't even have any concept of it if I hadn't experimented with those films.

    Does that kind of makes sense?

    I know this is your last post and that's okay, as I said earlier I do value everyone's information and feedback so thank you.

  4. #94

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,142
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    1
    what is it that you need in your set-up that will allow you to contact print ?

    light bulb?
    2 cheap tupperware trays?
    4$ lowes/home despot bucket?
    piece of glass?

    thats pretty much all it takes ...
    you dont' really even need a dark-room
    Last edited by jnanian; 11-23-2013 at 02:27 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
    artwork often times sold for charity
    PM me for details

  5. #95

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lange View Post
    quoted for emphasis.

    The only time you will see a token characteristic of a film in a real life situation will be if you shoot the same image on three or four different emulsions (a medium format camera with multiple backs would facilitate this nicely), process them all to the standard time for box speed in a normal developer, and then make identical prints on identically graded paper.

    But I wouldn't know because I shoot HP5+, Tri-X, and Neopan 400 basically interchangeably with little variation in handling, and I seem to have no problem printing or scanning my negs.

    When I was still in school a professor of mine chided a student for making a bokeh-laden photograph with no substance, saying that "This is a picture of your lens, not your subject". What you are asking for is very similar. You want to be able to identify a certain photograph as a picture of that emulsion. What's the point? There is not a secret room deep within Kodak's walls where in a hermetically sealed vault contains the -definitive- print of what Tri-X developed in D76 1+1 and printed at Grade 3 looks like. If it matters that much to you, then you have bigger problems than curiosity.
    If you are honestly serious that you can't tell the difference between Neopan 400 vs Tri-X or Neopan400 vs HP5+... Then I feel sorry for you, because I sure can... VERY different looks.

    That said, I totally get your comments that your professor made about shooting the lens, that totally makes sense and so I will take that under advisement to be wary of what I'm really doing

  6. #96
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,414
    Images
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    As far as being all over the place, once I came back to film in 2010/2011 I wanted to experience all of the different films that everyone talked about that were so amazing...
    I think the point Thomas was making is that a film is not "amazing". A photo may be, a photographer may be, but the film itself isn't.

  7. #97

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by eddie View Post
    I think the point Thomas was making is that a film is not "amazing". A photo may be, a photographer may be, but the film itself isn't.
    If film weren't amazing then why do people and things like Kodachrome and verichrome pan or Plus-X ... "oh I wish I could get that back it was such an amazing film"... etc. etc. I hear this time and time and time again...

    I understand the concept of what you're saying, but in reality people learn characteristics of a certain kind of film and love shooting with that particular kind of film I'm not saying everyone's like that, but many photographers are, and many photographers value the knowledge they learn from each kind of film, if they didn't no one would care if E100G disappeared because Velvia is still available... Ya know? (Using an extreme example since you guys keep saying that the black-and-white examples I'm using are ... Getting through...) lol

  8. #98

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,142
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    If film weren't amazing then why do people and things like Kodachrome and verichrome pan or Plus-X ... "oh I wish I could get that back it was such an amazing film"... etc. etc. I hear this time and time and time again...

    people love chasing magic bullets ..
    Last edited by jnanian; 11-23-2013 at 02:30 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
    artwork often times sold for charity
    PM me for details

  9. #99

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,241
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    people love chasing magic bullets ..
    Haha that's true

  10. #100
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,414
    Images
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    If film weren't amazing then why do people and things like Kodachrome and verichrome pan or Plus-X ... "oh I wish I could get that back it was such an amazing film"... etc. etc. I hear this time and time and time again...
    I think it's partially nostalgia, a bit like looking back on an old girlfriend. With time, people are prone to remember the good over the bad. It may also be because some photographers spent years, or decades, working with a particular emulsion, and had their technique completely dialed in. Losing those emulsions was frustrating, and they had to start from scratch with a new film.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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