Harsh professor in me.... if you haven't printed but plan to you better start printing now! Making negatives to print with vs scan with are two different places. Printing is much less forgiving. Everyone who posts here has to go d-pug sort of unless we mail prints around.
Originally Posted by whowantstoast
I'm not buying that if someone has 1000+ things to say that they can't show a few examples of their work.
whowwantstoast... I'll give you a pass... only 24 posts.
Micheal R. I dunno what is the point of being here if you aren't fully immersed (my opinion). EVERY professor I studied under showed their work to the class at some point. I see APUG as a great place to exchange ideas... I like to poke around the gallery for 10 minutes in the morning while sipping coffee. And that is why I posted more prints last month, and will try to put up something new again by summer.
The main thing I am pointing out (which seems to be missed) is so many people sign up here as "passionate about photography and traditional workflow" but just talk and ask about which is better etc. I was/am pointing out that there are so many that have made huge contributions to the visual canon that have not or never will give much a care about what machines they use to create this work. I will argue that even HBC used his fist Leica's out of convenience that they were there and the best he could afford at the time... (late 30's early 40's) Japanese camera copies were a good 5-10 years out... this is the main reason Leica and Rollie are vaunted, but in reality they "legends" were made mostly because they were just about the only reliable tools around. Same goes for Hasselblad,.. they went to orbit... then to the moon (why switch what you know -- same goes for HBC in the 1950's and 1960's...), and the Japanese equivalents weren't on the table yet it was the early 1960's and 1970's... .... and that comes round to my OP ad folks like Vivian.
Last edited by vpwphoto; 03-05-2013 at 06:18 PM. Click to view previous post history.