I have to admit though, Sirius did make me laugh with stink-jet.
Printable View
I have to admit though, Sirius did make me laugh with stink-jet.
OzJohn, hold a print on single weight or double weight paper and looking at it will always beat looking at a computer screen or a gloppy stink-jet print on crappy paper. If you can't tell the difference, why bother to continue the conversation.
I don't print anything except proofs on ijet so on that score I don't disagree with you. I just think that your preferred definition of a "real" photograph is way off beam. A photograph is the image created in a camera. A print is nothing more than an interpretation of that image made by a particular person at a particular time and there are countless different interpretations possible. OzJohnQuote:
Originally Posted by Sirius Glass
Promote it by shooting film a lot in public, any one asks abt the camera take a min to explain it and how easy it is (eg film easy avail at Amazon, drop off Walmart avail, darkroom home b/w process easy eyc). Not pushy, just chatty, etc
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by zsas
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Sirius Glass
this reminds me of a guy who was here on apug way in the beginning
he railed on and on about how bad the other medium was ...
and chris jordan met up with him and showed him some of his prints
and he never railed anyone again ... ( and actually apologized ) ...
a photograph is a " light drawing '
and there are many different ways to do that ... some with chemicals some without ...
i've shown things i have made with the other medium to people who were so called experts
and they couldn't tell me which ones were made with chemicals and which ones weren't ...
i don't think your statements are true ...
I am not sure it will matter. The sad part is that the film manufacturing segment of Kodak has been kept going the last several years by the motion picture industry. Now all of the movie houses are insisting on converting as quickly as possible to digital projection for the efficiency and cost savings. It is happening scary fast. Kodak's excess capacity will sky-rocket to the area of 80% or higher within 2 to 3 years. This cannot be maintained and so they will probably try to completely restructure this business and sell it off. The scaled down version of the operation may attempt to keep a couple C-41 films going at higher prices. Not sure how many labs will hang in there - maybe a handful.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDR
= tommy
A local school gave me two more enlargers last week, so today, I am holding a "Free Darkroom Workshop". That is, I am hosting an acquaintance who is interested in trying darkroom work. We will spend a few hours learning some basic techniques, and when he leaves, he is taking with him a small but complete darkroom setup for his own home. It was going to end up in the trash, but this way there is a chance it will get some use. Wish me luck.
Just as a follow up, this turned into a very enjoyable and successful afternoon. A young husband/wife with a passion for photography came over and spent three hours with me in my darkroom. They left with their own prints, an enlarger, trays, timer, safelight, etc., all of which were surplus to me. They were heading straight for the photography store to pick up film, paper and chemicals. All in all, a great day in service of traditional photographic techniques. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Toffle
BTW, that's how you promote film use.
Well done, Tom!
On a smaller scale I've been trying to do the same, by introducing some friends and acquaintances to the world of film based photography I've successfully added a couple of enthusiasts to the ranks of practitioners. I'm very proud of that, and continue to support them with a lens here and there, some film, or maybe a few trays or something.
- Thomas