If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 05:00:20 GMT, "Michael Hadac"
somehow managed to impart: You're about 30 years too late... Digital is in... Sorry not too many takers for that Ilford stuff. Spent too many years with it, would never go back to it. Michael. That's exactly how I feel. I couldn't be bothered letting all that chemistry and temperature control get in the way again. Enlargers degrade the image as well, even with a good lens stopped right down. Digital revitalised my photography. Dave. 2180 hi-resolution photos especially Edinburgh & Scotland. Also 3D rendered art & altered images. * No advertisements * http://www.henniker.org.uk |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave" dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote in message ... Digital is in... Sorry not too many takers for that Ilford stuff. Spent too many years with it, would never go back to it. That's exactly how I feel. I couldn't be bothered letting all that chemistry and temperature control get in the way again. Enlargers degrade the image as well, even with a good lens stopped right down. Digital revitalised my photography. Just as, 100 years ago, chemical photography completely killed off the art of drawing with a pencil. Now you can't get pencils anywhere. Right? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
You're joking, right?
Digital can't touch chemical photography. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael A. Covington" wrote
Just as, 100 years ago, chemical photography completely killed off the art of drawing with a pencil. Now you can't get pencils anywhere. Right? Welllll, actually: half right. Can't get a good ordinary office-style wood pencil anymo A Blackwing, a #1 Venus Velvet ... they don't make them any more. The best I can do is a Sanford Turquoise drawing pencil; I still have a '60s vintage Blackwing for comparison and the Sanford is not even close. A Pentel 0.5mm with 2B HiPolymer lead is the closest I can find to a decent pencil. So the only good pencils these days are for art, engineering and architecture. -- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael A. Covington" wrote
Just as, 100 years ago, chemical photography completely killed off the art of drawing with a pencil. Now you can't get pencils anywhere. Right? Welllll, actually: half right. Can't get a good ordinary office-style wood pencil anymo A Blackwing, a #1 Venus Velvet ... they don't make them any more. The best I can do is a Sanford Turquoise drawing pencil; I still have a '60s vintage Blackwing for comparison and the Sanford is not even close. A Pentel 0.5mm with 2B HiPolymer lead is the closest I can find to a decent pencil. So the only good pencils these days are for art, engineering and architecture. -- Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics. Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/ |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote: That's exactly how I feel. I couldn't be bothered letting all that chemistry and temperature control get in the way again. Enlargers degrade the image as well, even with a good lens stopped right down. Digital revitalised my photography. Why post to a darkroom newsgroup then if thats how you feel. Your wrong btw. Its only those that have half the skills that completely prefer digital "imop". There is a digital newsgroup, if that's were you belong then stay there please, otherwise can I put you in my killfile? -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
In article ExPvd.516881$%k.367923@pd7tw2no,
"Michael Hadac" wrote: You're about 30 years too late... Digital is in... Sorry not too many takers for that Ilford stuff. Spent too many years with it, would never go back to it. Michael. It may be in, but there will be regrets,...almost a guarantee. -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Hadac wrote: You're about 30 years too late... Digital is in... About as "in" as replying to crossposts by trolls. If you're as smart a digital imager as you are a nsg reader, you're in real trouble.... Sorry not too many takers for that Ilford stuff. Spent too many years with it, would never go back to it. Michael. "me" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...to35mmdarkroom Are we talking genuine wet dark room, as in real photography? Film, Ahhhh! me |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:19:03 GMT, Gregory Blank
somehow managed to impart: In article , Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote: That's exactly how I feel. I couldn't be bothered letting all that chemistry and temperature control get in the way again. Enlargers degrade the image as well, even with a good lens stopped right down. Digital revitalised my photography. Why post to a darkroom newsgroup then if thats how you feel. Your wrong btw. Its only those that have half the skills that completely prefer digital "imop". I thought this was alt.photography. I used a darkroom for years and am a former international exhibitor at the Edinburgh Festival. It's the image that's important, not the method of production. Dave. 2180 hi-resolution photos especially Edinburgh & Scotland. Also 3D rendered art & altered images. * No advertisements * http://www.henniker.org.uk |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Dave wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:19:03 GMT, Gregory Blank somehow managed to impart: In article , Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote: That's exactly how I feel. I couldn't be bothered letting all that chemistry and temperature control get in the way again. Enlargers degrade the image as well, even with a good lens stopped right down. Digital revitalised my photography. Why post to a darkroom newsgroup then if thats how you feel. Your wrong btw. Its only those that have half the skills that completely prefer digital "imop". I thought this was alt.photography. Try (1) reading the headers and (2) learn how to recognize a troll. The OP is trolling and crossposting. Your observations and knowledge of nsgs appears as limited as your knowledge of enlarging and optics... Clearly, you've never seen an Ansel Adams mural sized enlargement. No little P&S digital MP res will ever come close to the enlargement quality possible with LF film. Enlarging isn't the issue. It's the quality of the optics. Digital also uses lenses (surprise) but due to *Nyquist* limitations (look it up...) simply can't use the same high quality optics film imaging can. A good leica lens is merely wasted on a typical digital camera system. I used a darkroom for years and am a former international exhibitor at the Edinburgh Festival. It's the image that's important, not the method of production. Another "all that really counts is the picture on the wall" excuse. If that were true, there'd be no distinction between _any_ image. I.e., we (and every gallery owner everywhere) wouldn't make distinctions between different mediums of image making and the resulting type of prints. You have it completely backwards -- or clearly haven't exhibited in too many galleries, since what is _always_ noted is the _type_ of image/print being displayed. People (curators and especially buyers who plunk down their money for artwork) want to know what type of image and process they're getting. It's sort of the whole point. Paintings are "images," as are X-rays (Man Ray), Carbon prints, Cyanotypes, and even television. But they're different images and different processes. Digital "images" are not photographs. They're electronic data imaging produced photoelectrically. There is no image, just data representing an image, until one outputs that data in a print form. It may be an inkjet, a "giclee," or a Lightjet. But it's not a photograph same as a classic silver image. Apples and oranges... Dave. 2180 hi-resolution photos especially Edinburgh & Scotland. Also 3D rendered art & altered images. * No advertisements * http://www.henniker.org.uk |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I started 35mm B&W darkroom forum | [email protected] | In The Darkroom | 0 | December 11th 04 01:41 AM |
Getting married in the UK or Ireland - WedUK have just started a new Wedding Forum | The Warrior | 35mm Photo Equipment | 4 | November 26th 04 01:20 AM |
35mm on grade 3 explained | Michael Scarpitti | In The Darkroom | 240 | September 26th 04 02:46 AM |
advantage of high $ 35mm optics vs. MF now lost? | Bob Monaghan | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 30 | September 12th 04 04:46 AM |
Develper for Delta-100 | Frank Pittel | In The Darkroom | 8 | March 1st 04 05:36 PM |