Darkroom Advantage

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by wishful thinker, Jul 8, 2007.

  1. wishful thinker

    Jew Guest

    The same way you interest a hamburger and hot-dog habituated American in
    Japanese cuisine. Who wants to bother?
     
    Jew, Jul 10, 2007
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Yes, thanks.
    It depends upon the price and the method of shipment. The total taxes
    on photographic equipment is VAT (value added tax, 16.5%). If you ship
    by the US Postal Service, there is an excemption for gifts and cheap items.
    Technicaly the excemption is $200, some times it's less ($50), sometimes they
    let more expensive items through without tax.

    Sometimes they argue over value, almost always they don't.

    I would really appreciate anything sent my way.

    Thanks,

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jul 10, 2007
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. I'm not sure of the exact date, I'll see if I could find it. It was a
    great scoop on the Russians. The first digital satellite (thought it may
    have used analog tape) was designed to drop dummy films for a few weeks.
    The Russians kept track of it and when it stopped they assumed it ran
    out of film and ignored it.

    It took lots of good pictures of things that were normally hidden
    when a satellite passed overhead.
    I know, that sucks, doesn't it. But then how many people watched VHS video tape
    and thought it was good. :)
    I wonder how sucessfull they really will be. Canon seems to be the only
    company doing well in the full frame (24x36mm) sensor market for
    consumer (non scientific or military) cameras. Considering you can buy
    for very little money in comparison a 4/3 size sensor with 12mp, the
    difference is not that much.

    In a few years the 4/3 sensors will be obsolete. The trend is to make them as
    small as possible as it reduces manufacturing costs for everything besides the
    sensor.
    True, but 100 years ago contact prints from fixed focus, fixed exposure
    Kodak cameras sufficed for most. Once a certain minimum quality has been
    achived the market stabilizes for a while.

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jul 10, 2007
    #43
  4. Speaking as a father of two boys (12 and 9) who eat Sushi, I do. But there
    is a difference between teaching them new things, versus teaching them
    old ways to do the things they like.

    My 12 year old is not interested in black and white in any form. He simply
    won't look at it or watch it on TV. As for chemical processing, it takes
    too long. He'll gladly use a film camera (push the button) and looks at the
    prints, but how they got from button push to paper is of no interest.

    My 9 year old shows even less interest, but he wonders how things work, so there
    is hope for him yet.

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jul 10, 2007
    #44
  5. Dana Myers wrote:
    Read again:

    o One can see the difference
    o Anyone can see the difference
    o Anyone isn't good at seeing differences

    There isn't any argument, just a series of observations.
    Who said that? Oh, yes ...
    Phrase comes to my mind also.
    If the gap is closing then photography is regressing, logical?
    Who's debating? It's a one-man debate and I am not in it.
    It was? It is? Where?
    My point is just that also. We agree.

    Why is it, when it is mentioned ink-jet doesn't look like
    silver-gelatine there is this massive jerking of knees?

    A better question is why does ink-jet/digital even _want to_
    look like silver gelatine.

    The only thing inferior about digital is it's complex.
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jul 10, 2007
    #45
  6. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    Well, maybe not necessarily an insult.

    I love to get very close to a work of art and
    examine the little details closely, with my
    eyeglasses off.

    When the huge exhibit of van Gogh's paintings
    came to town, I loved being able to look at
    individual brush strokes made by his hands.
    It's not because I'm such an expert or
    looking for nothing but technique; I just
    love to look at the work, and I find both
    distant and close viewing very rewarding.

    I think a big part of my life-long
    development is the fact that I'm much more
    comfortable minus sight correction, hence my
    tendency to get close.

    Of course, I feel the same way about
    photographs.

    regards,
    --le
    ________________________________
    Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
    website: www.heylloyd.com
    telephone: 416-686-0326
    email:
    ________________________________
    --
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #46
  7. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    Your work will be pretty close to unique in
    the near to distant future! Pretty soon you
    may be making the only silver based prints in
    Jerusalem -- that should please the
    curators... in 2075.

    But my guess is there are others, maybe
    plenty of them, but they don't bother looking
    or listening to others, they just get on with
    what they're doing.

    Me, I've succumbed to the heat (and what a
    wimp, it's only Toronto heat!) and I'm
    sitting under my little air conditioner
    tapping away here at my keyboard.

    My safelights need new bulbs, and that seems
    a big chore right now. Pure laziness.

    regards,
    --le
    ________________________________
    Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
    website: www.heylloyd.com
    telephone: 416-686-0326
    email:
    ________________________________
    --
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #47
  8. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    I certainly agree with you (well, I would,
    wouldn't I?).

    But right away we're faced with the challenge
    to look at a bunch of prints and see if we
    can tell the difference.

    The other day I was in a camera shop (Natalie
    wanted a pair of low power binoculars for the
    opera, so there I was). I couldn't help
    looking over the display of digital cameras,
    and goggled at the huge Canon rig wearing the
    $8700 tag. I chatted with the sales guy, who
    baldly said digital is "better" than film.
    It would never occur to him that a darkroom
    print could be as good or better than a
    computer output print. Thoughts like look and
    feel don't apply...

    We're dinosaurs, all right, and we're being
    replaced by the mice.

    regards,
    --le
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #48
  9. wishful thinker

    Dana Myers Guest

    We're speaking about different things here. You say that
    "digital sensors exist ... which can produce better
    monochrome images". You're absolutely right, no disagreement.
    But - this depends on the definition of "better". I'm not talking
    about technical superiority when I refer to the "character and
    soul" of a B&W print - I'm talking about the look that comes
    from capturing on silver-halide film.

    Dana
     
    Dana Myers, Jul 10, 2007
    #49
  10. wishful thinker

    Dana Myers Guest

    An excellent observation; we have a tendency to compare a very mature
    technology (silver-halide film, paper and processes) to a relatively
    new and still rapidly-evolving techology (digital photography).

    Dana
     
    Dana Myers, Jul 10, 2007
    #50
  11. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    Wait! This could be the very reason to
    bother.

    I was raised on overcooked, even burnt food.
    Liver prepared under the broiler. My
    education in fish showed me it came from a
    frozen box bearing the label Stix. My grand
    mother did make gefilte fish, but I was
    unable to appreciate it during her lifetime,
    I'm sad to say. But even that was ground
    fish...

    Now that I'm a geezer I can enjoy raw fish
    and rare beef and even the odd bit of liver
    done properly. Plus the foods of foreign
    cultures.

    For some young people, the unusual way of
    doing something is more attractive. Computer
    output won't necessarily appeal to everyone.

    regards,
    --le
    ________________________________
    Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
    website: www.heylloyd.com
    telephone: 416-686-0326
    email:
    ________________________________
    --
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #51
  12. If sales of darkroom timers are anything to go by
    75% of traditional printers don't have anything to do
    with the internet.

    And the average age is 72.

    These numbers are probably skewed as I am most
    likely getting the 'high-tech' end of the
    spectrum.

    ***

    Interestingly, the internet leads are the ones
    most leery of doing anything new.
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jul 10, 2007
    #52
  13. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    It's inferiority complex, you mean?

    (I'm sorry, couldn't resist, probably too
    late to be first with this obvious one ...)

    regards,
    --le
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #53
  14. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    Yes, I can certainly see how this would be
    the case.

    I'm sure we all have examples of such people.
    A good friend of mine (younger than I am, so
    the model does not hold perfectly) had no
    interest in the Internet for many years. He
    always had the strength of mind to eliminate
    anything and everything that was unproductive
    in his opinion. So if one suggested, for
    example, getting into the government arts
    grant game, his response was "just print!"
    He'd say that to nearly any suggestion.

    He sends and receives email today...

    regards,
    --le
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #54
  15. In another I should have patented it moment, I suggested on a
    newsgroup or photography list that somebody should write a
    photoshop plugin that converts a digital image to the
    spectral response and to use a digital term, dynamic range
    of film. You could use a Tri-X filter, or a T-Max filter,
    or whatever.

    I don't have a URL, but I recently read about such a product
    in a photo magazine. :-(

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jul 10, 2007
    #55
  16. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest



    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    The impetus for many of us, I'm sure,
    including people who prefer digital.

    Nothing compares with fiddling with exciting
    powdered substances, eh? I'm just glad I had
    a fear of syringes ...

    regards,
    --le
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #56
  17. I've had this theory that the dinosaurs were done in
    by rats. At the time Dino died the Ur-Mammal was a
    small possum like insect eater. When this insect eater
    developed rodent teeth the age of mammals began. I imagine
    a plague of egg-eating rats did the dinosaurs in.

    If explained to the creationists that man was descended
    from the rat I imagine that they could raise little argument.
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jul 10, 2007
    #57
  18. wishful thinker

    Lloyd Erlick Guest


    July 10, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

    They sometimes express the belief that humans
    and dinosaurs existed at the same time.

    In that case, humans could have been the
    direct cause of the extinction of dinosaurs.

    Yummy lizard eggs...

    regards,
    --le
     
    Lloyd Erlick, Jul 10, 2007
    #58
  19. Er, that was the meaning. I see I used the wrong "it's" -
    it's "its".
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jul 10, 2007
    #59
  20. wishful thinker

    Dana Myers Guest

    There's at least two of these plug-ins that I'm personally
    aware of. After a little experimentation with them, I found they
    do a pretty credible job of tweaking the spectral response of an
    image. But I have yet to see a grain/accutance filter that even
    comes close.

    This reminds of the folks striving to achieve classic vacuum-tube
    sound in solid-state sound devices (particularly guitar amplifiers
    and effects). They're getting really, *really* close, but it's just
    not quite the same.

    Perhaps not ironically, one of the most successful techniques is
    to use a vacuum-tube in a low-level stage to 'color' the audio,
    followed by a solid-state amplifier chain designed for very
    low distortion.

    Dana
     
    Dana Myers, Jul 10, 2007
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.