Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Posts for: Darkroom317
Page: <<prev 1 ... 144 145 146 147 148 next>>
Feb 12, 2013 18:23:23   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
I think I'm staying with film--revisited
Glad that you are no dissuaded from your decision. Also, I am 23 and I love film so not everyone who does it is old.
Go to
Feb 12, 2013 15:40:52   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Was film really any good
Still use it, so yes it is good.
Go to
Feb 11, 2013 20:22:46   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Ansel Adam & PP
selmslie wrote:
stan0301 wrote:
Actually, color negative was "liberated" from Germany at the end of WWII, prior to that Kodachrome had come along in 1935. When I worked with Ansel in Yosemite I can assure you that he was very interested in working with color, and had tried to do the same sorts of things with it that he had perfected with B&W--Except the eye would not accept the "manipulated" print thus produced. With B&W he would commonly spend an hour--often more printing a single print.
Stan

Not quite correct. Kodachrome was first and Agfacolor followed but this was before WW II. During WW II, Agfa and Kodak continued development imdependently, Kodak did not get its technology from Agfa.
quote=stan0301 Actually, color negative was "... (show quote)


Yep, Kodachrome was actually being tested in 1922.
Go to
Feb 11, 2013 15:39:02   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Ansel Adam & PP
In most his writings he states that he did not want to do color. He did shoot color for Kodak when they were improving Kodachrome. Also, he died in 1984, Kodachrome came out in 1935. That is 49 years to do color. He said that he did not like it for lack of control, so maybe today he would do color. But most likely not.
Go to
Feb 11, 2013 15:28:55   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
I think I'm staying with film
So, I am also a painter who uses oils. Art is generally not immeadiate and does not have a deadline so who cares how fast you can get an image out. I also work as a photojournalist. I use and love digtial for its immeadiacy for that work. They both have their place, as do oils and acylics. Painters did not ditch one or the other, nor did they ditch painting as a whole when photography came around.
Go to
Feb 11, 2013 15:07:55   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
I think I'm staying with film
stan0301 wrote:
I think the thing you will find to be the game killer is the fact that film is going to vanish--
Stan


Yet, there are no indications that it will in the near future. As for me I am both a technophile and a luddite. I still can't figure out it works but it does.
Go to
Feb 11, 2013 11:56:25   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
I think I'm staying with film
UP-2-IT wrote:
pj81156 wrote:
I'm not really looking for people to dissuade me, but after having to spend so much time with my digital slr to take a picture because of its vast array of features, I think I'm going back to my Nikon f5. In Program with my Nikon I never had a bad exposure, and when I wanted to depart from Program it was so easy to change metering, f stop and shutter speed. And that was it. Instant gratification is not that important to me. Well, maybe I do want to see if I can be dissuaded. I live in the woods on a lake and that's where I do most of my photography. And, I have all the time I need. Observations please.
I'm not really looking for people to dissuade me, ... (show quote)


Good luck finding a developer.
quote=pj81156 I'm not really looking for people t... (show quote)


It really isn't that difficult. http://www.freestylephoto.biz/
Go to
Feb 11, 2013 09:16:26   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Difference between snapshot and photograph
Are Henri Cartier-Bressons images, snapshots, photographs or art? He did not extensively prepare for his images.
Go to
Feb 11, 2013 09:07:37   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
I think I'm staying with film
Seriously. don't listen to most of these people. Even with RAW digital still does not have the range that film has. I see far more highlight detail even in my slide images that my digital ones that is why I am switching my color work back.

You may want to find a more friendly forum: http://www.apug.org/forums/home.php
Go to
Feb 10, 2013 20:36:38   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Difference between snapshot and photograph
chrome98 wrote:
I can't believe I'm replying to this post again.

A snapshot is a photograph. ANYTHING recorded on film or sensor is a photograph. It doesn't matter who, what where, when. The photograph is the medium, not the subject nor process. If you take an accidental pic in your pocket with your phone its as much a photograph as the one that you took all day setting up on your pro cam.


Thank You, they are all photographs. The intention determines snapshot or not, not the medium used.

By the logic expressed early about JPEG vs RAW, I will say that JPEGs are snapshots, RAW images are photographs and film images are Art.

Also, I am a photojournalist. I use JPEG because I don't have time to edit RAW images. Are they photographs or snapshots?
Go to
Feb 10, 2013 20:33:21   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Ansel Adam & PP
He did spot some things out. There actually is more you can do in the darkroom than what you have mentioned such as print bleaching and masking. He did solarize one image but he did so by drastically overexposing the film.
Go to
Feb 10, 2013 18:27:00   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
I think I'm staying with film
Glad to here it. I have been doing all of my own b&w work for the past 3.5 years. I have decided this year to back to shooting color slide film. I miss the great color and depth that positive film gives.
Go to
Feb 9, 2013 21:18:15   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Difference between snapshot and photograph
The intention of the image determines this. If it taken to be art or documentary then it is such.
Go to
Feb 9, 2013 21:05:23   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
This is Bokeh
Digital cameras don't have the best bokeh. Try an old film camera back when they had far more aperture blades in lenses. The number of aperture blades determine the shape of bokeh. My 1957 Rolleicord produces beautiful bokeh. However, I seldom use it for that. As it has been said todays photographers have made a big deal about bokeh because it makes them think that they are artists or being more artistic, when it is nearing becoming kitsch.
Go to
Feb 7, 2013 22:29:08   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Anybody use Medium Format?
stan0301 wrote:
Yes but--with a Nikon D-800 you can take about 100 36mb pix for what one 4x5 is going to cost--and when you photograph a group you can see the individual threads in their clothes.
Stan


Actually 4x5 equipment can be found for a lot cheaper than a D800. Also, you should look into resolution studies. Digital has a long way to go to catch up with 4x5. Computer screens are small and don't really mean anything. The print means more and you can achieve better prints with optically printed 4x5.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 144 145 146 147 148 next>>
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.