This process is great fun and can be developed, otherwise I don't get it - I just don't understand the raving about something we have all tried, looked at and generally moved on from - This will be great if Jessica develops the work and pushes the process forward
But essentially I don't get such an obvious George Platt-Lynes homage
My wife Rae has just told me off for the above post - She did that is in her role as pinhole to cyanotype and gum bichromate worker with me as her dark room boy and trouble shooter
I'm not familiar with this pic posted above. I'm doing a series of my kids with outdoor things (bird nests, sticks, rocks, antlers etc and thought this was a fun idea- with him holding the antlers up). I'm learning my 8x10 camera and enjoy seeing a bit more immediate results and I like what is coming out of it on the paper. I do plan to work on this more. I would think it is good to have even these new people like me that are excited about processes (even if they are old to other people)...we are at different levels of learning and experimenting- that's not a bad thing. At 35 years old I have a lot more ahead of me to learn I know and new things excite me when I can work with my own hands to do it- instead of digital,etc...
I use paper negatives mostly for portraits. With a couple of reasons:
1: it is much cheaper than film use.
2: it is much faster than film use..
3: I have rather big cameras - films for these are hard to get (and really, really expensive)
4: the most important reason: paper negatives give me something film doesn't. The orthochromatic sensitivity and also the imprint of the fibers in the paper used as negative. It can give me reaults I'd never be able to get from normal film.
the idea that it has been done before and therefore should be ignored is not my thinking.
I'm not moving foreward. I am moving in all directions. and if that takes be "back", then it is fine by me...
Jessica: congrats on your new "apartment"... now you "just" have to furnish it..
BTW: try fiberbased paper for the end result. That can give you even better looking images...
I also think the surface of the paper also has an impact in terms of glossy, semimatt, satin, and matt.
no need to worry about anything ...
a lot of people who have 30, even 40years experience doing darkroom and camerawork have no idea how to make paper negatives
they have no idea that if you don't have a negative but you have a print, you can make a paper negative from the print,
they have no idea you can retouch the paper negative with pencils, or it is possible to have fun just doing something that is as old
as the dawn of photography.
i love making paper negatives not because i think i am doing something new, but because it is FUN ...
and a lot of photography seems to be ignoring the fun aspect of using a camera, with people more interested
in gear-talk &c ...
you ARE grumpy :)
[QUOTE=gandolfi;1333040]well - if you ask me everything has been done...QUOTE]
Still, this chick is way to excited about photography. Where's the frustration? The aggravation? The disappointment? The resentment?
Photography is her friend, not her husband. :DQuote:
<snip>...this chick is way to excited about photography. Where's the frustration? The aggravation? The disappointment? The resentment?