The intensity of film.

[N80]

I hadn't realised what a terrible crime I was committing in the eyes of the assembled digirazzi.

Just because some of us don't share your opinion of film does not mean that anyone accused you of a "terrible crime". No one accused you of anything really. I don't think anyone here is bothered in the slightest regarding your opinion on film.

And the "assembled digirazzi" as you have apparently labeled 99.9% of the photographic community are "assembled" to discuss a topic you posted in an open topic discussion forum. This might not have been the best place to post if you were only looking for responses that affirmed your opinion.

And again, I'm playing with film now too. Just got 8 rolls of B&W film, a new tank and $50 worth of chemicals. But I still don't buy into attempts to objectify the intangible benefits of film. It is what it is and what it is is pretty easy to quantify. If it has an emotional appeal for you (as it does for me too) that is great. But there is no reason to put anyone down ("digirazzi" sounds derogatory to me) for not sharing that emotional appeal.

[Rob C]

Just because some of us don't share your opinion of film does not mean that anyone accused you of a "terrible crime". No one accused you of anything really. I don't think anyone here is bothered in the slightest regarding your opinion on film.

And the "assembled digirazzi" as you have apparently labeled 99.9% of the photographic community are "assembled" to discuss a topic you posted in an open topic discussion forum. This might not have been the best place to post if you were only looking for responses that affirmed your opinion.

And again, I'm playing with film now too. Just got 8 rolls of B&W film, a new tank and $50 worth of chemicals. But I still don't buy into attempts to objectify the intangible benefits of film. It is what it is and what it is is pretty easy to quantify. If it has an emotional appeal for you (as it does for me too) that is great. But there is no reason to put anyone down ("digirazzi" sounds derogatory to me) for not sharing that emotional appeal.

Maybe unlike moi you understand German; regardless, enjoy these creative moments with film. Man, what a face the young Penelope has!

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=peter+lindbergh+videos&view=detail&mid=057589A66B30A3BDF2DE057589A66B30A3BDF2DE&FORM=VIRE

Rob

[N80]

None of that made any sense to me. But that's okay.

[mbaginy]

Maybe unlike moi you understand German; regardless, enjoy these creative moments with film. Man, what a face the young Penelope has!

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=peter+lindbergh+videos&view=detail&mid=057589A66B30A3BDF2DE057589A66B30A3BDF2DE&FORM=VIRE

Rob

An interesting film, Rob.  Yes, I do understand German and enjoyed the video.  That reminds me, I need to develop a few rolls of Tri-X.  Hate the scanning!  Dust is my major enemy.

[Rob C]

An interesting film, Rob.  Yes, I do understand German and enjoyed the video.  That reminds me, I need to develop a few rolls of Tri-X.  Hate the scanning!  Dust is my major enemy.

Wonderful! I envy you that. It's the kind of situation that I feel interviews should embrace: less of the interviewer and lots more from the person being interviewed. For me, the interest lies in that person's thinking, far more than in the way he/she goes about achieving the images. There have been a couple of Sarah Moon spots where she embarks on her flow of consciousness thing, and it's where I find the gold: in her mind, not in her camera's brand, focal lengths etc. etc. as unique as those choices may be.

But that's hard to do: you need the person be willing to open up and have the time, from both sides, to devote to the term required to do it. So much more simple to cheat and just show a few 'popular' images from the files and repeat what everybody already knows.

Rob

[GrahamBy]

Agree, although I was happy to learn about the relative risks of working with cheetahs and leopards.
Did I mention the woman I knew who had kept her boyfriend's pet leopard in her apartment in Paris while he was away? She took it for walks in the Bois de Boulogne on a leash. I suspect the leash was only symbolically useful, even if he was old and missing a few teeth.
Ah, the 70's...

[Justinr]

Just because some of us don't share your opinion of film does not mean that anyone accused you of a "terrible crime". No one accused you of anything really. I don't think anyone here is bothered in the slightest regarding your opinion on film.

And the "assembled digirazzi" as you have apparently labeled 99.9% of the photographic community are "assembled" to discuss a topic you posted in an open topic discussion forum. This might not have been the best place to post if you were only looking for responses that affirmed your opinion.

And again, I'm playing with film now too. Just got 8 rolls of B&W film, a new tank and $50 worth of chemicals. But I still don't buy into attempts to objectify the intangible benefits of film. It is what it is and what it is is pretty easy to quantify. If it has an emotional appeal for you (as it does for me too) that is great. But there is no reason to put anyone down ("digirazzi" sounds derogatory to me) for not sharing that emotional appeal.

Whatever, you'll pardon me for agreeing totally and completely and slitting my belly open in the shame of having ever having thought up the word digirazzi, it's far less painful than going over the same old ground again and again and pointing out that I too do all my work on digital bar these few films and wouldn't change back for commercial work, which is 99% of what I do nowadays.

Goodbye cruel world!

[Telecaster]

It's strange how much feeling gets projected into something that is only an intermediary stage. Unless you are viewing transparencies, no one actually sees the film; they see the final print, of course, which is true even with trannies most of the time.

I've gotta say I feel sorry for anyone who's never had the pleasure of looking at Kodachrome trannies with a loupe on a light-table, or even with a cheapie illuminated magnifier box, and seeing the intense reds in photos of roses or geraniums or columbines or fire hydrants float 3D-style above the rest of the image. When I used Kodachrome, especially 64 & the later 200, I made a point of photographing just about anything red.

-Dave-

[Rob C]

I've gotta say I feel sorry for anyone who's never had the pleasure of looking at Kodachrome trannies with a loupe on a light-table, or even with a cheapie illuminated magnifier box, and seeing the intense reds in photos of roses or geraniums or columbines or fire hydrants float 3D-style above the rest of the image. When I used Kodachrome, especially 64 & the later 200, I made a point of photographing just about anything red.

-Dave-

I hope this wasn't during that Senator Joe McC's time!

;-)

Rob

[Telecaster]

Kinda ironic that red is now the defacto color of the Pepsi-Cola Kid's party.

Judging by my dad's '50s Kodachromes the reds were even more saturated back then. Or maybe the world itself was more red then. My Aunt Anna, born in the late 19th century, insisted that the food she ate as a child was more innately flavorful than the stuff she was obliged to use as a senior citizen to keep my dad & me nourished. In particular she had a real beef with chicken. Maybe she was right…

In antiquity references to the color blue are few & far between. Things we'd describe as obviously blue, like the sky, are instead described as various shades of red or green.

In the TV show Fringe the alternate universe, where alternate versions of the show's main characters live (interactions between the two universes drive most of the show's best episodes), has a red tilt to it. The Green Arrow and Green Lantern comic book characters are Red, for example. (Also, the alt universe's USA has somewhat different borders to "ours" and the president on its $20 bill is Martin Luther King, Jr. In fact $20s are nicknamed "Juniors." And his predecessor in office, JFK, served two full terms. And Eric Stoltz played Marty McFly in Back To The Future while Ronald Reagan was Rick in Casablanca.)

Well, that was entirely on-topic!

-Dave-

[Justinr]

There are a few more here that prompted the OP -

http://www.inkplusimages.com/uyjo/index.html

[Rob C]

Kinda ironic that red is now the defacto color of the Pepsi-Cola Kid's party.

1.   Judging by my dad's '50s Kodachromes the reds were even more saturated back then. Or maybe the world itself was more red then. My Aunt Anna, born in the late 19th century, insisted that the food she ate as a child was more innately flavorful than the stuff she was obliged to use as a senior citizen to keep my dad & me nourished. In particular she had a real beef with chicken. Maybe she was right…

2.   In antiquity references to the color blue are few & far between. Things we'd describe as obviously blue, like the sky, are instead described as various shades of red or green.

In the TV show Fringe the alternate universe, where alternate versions of the show's main characters live (interactions between the two universes drive most of the show's best episodes), has a red tilt to it. The Green Arrow and Green Lantern comic book characters are Red, for example. (Also, the alt universe's USA has somewhat different borders to "ours" and the president on its $20 bill is Martin Luther King, Jr. In fact $20s are nicknamed "Juniors." And his predecessor in office, JFK, served two full terms. And Eric Stoltz played Marty McFly in Back To The Future while Ronald Reagan was Rick in Casablanca.)

3.   Well, that was entirely on-topic!

-Dave-

Dave,

1.  Aunt Anna was right: genetically modified food is unnatural - what else can you expect? It's also a product of the skills in cooking: since my wife's demise all my food prepared at home is third-grade: even buying the same brands of basic things like pasta results in less than okay meals because of the lack of the sense of making sauces. That's why I have given up trying to do that, and now make things my wife would have sorned. Or I eat out. Which is another sorry tale of how it was until the mid-80s and then changed - quite rapidly, with respect both to quality and pricing.

2.  Blue was a very difficult - and expensive - colour for artists to find/make; the best reason for turning it unpopular.

3.  I would expect no less from LuLa!

;-)

Rob C

[Telecaster]

Well, all food is genetically modified. You can do it via selective breeding, cross breeding or direct DNA-level tweaking…but modified is what you'll get regardless. Happens naturally too. Some pollen (or sperm) produced by a member of variety A gets into a member of variety B, et voilà: New variety C. It's the DNA-level stuff that makes many folks uneasy. Along with the sometimes arrogant attitude & behavior of some agribusiness megacorps.

The most intensely flavorful apples I've ever eaten have been recent varieties, the result of much intentional breeding effort over a long period. Lovely red color too!

I do suspect Anna was right about chicken. The intrinsic blandness is likely a by-product of what they're fed and how they've been bred (genetically modified) for mass "production." The meat makes a great platform for spice rubs & marinates, though. Take some paprika, cumin, cayenne pepper, salt and olive oil. Mix it all together and let your chicken breast or thigh soak in it for ~20 minutes per side. Then wipe the chicken dry and stir-fry/grill/bake/roast as desired.



-Dave-

[Justinr]

Well, all food is genetically modified. You can do it via selective breeding, cross breeding or direct DNA-level tweaking…but modified is what you'll get regardless. Happens naturally too. Some pollen (or sperm) produced by a member of variety A gets into a member of variety B, et voilà: New variety C. It's the DNA-level stuff that makes many folks uneasy. Along with the sometimes arrogant attitude & behavior of some agribusiness megacorps.

The most intensely flavorful apples I've ever eaten have been recent varieties, the result of much intentional breeding effort over a long period. Lovely red color too!

I do suspect Anna was right about chicken. The intrinsic blandness is likely a by-product of what they're fed and how they've been bred (genetically modified) for mass "production." The meat makes a great platform for spice rubs & marinates, though. Take some paprika, cumin, cayenne pepper, salt and olive oil. Mix it all together and let your chicken breast or thigh soak in it for ~20 minutes per side. Then wipe the chicken dry and stir-fry/grill/bake/roast as desired.



-Dave-

The problem with GM crops is not that they are the result of an advanced breeding programme but that genes are introduced which are not naturally present in the species altered, a process that is unknown in nature. There are also concerns that the chemicals that crops are engineered to work in tandem with may have unknown health hazards and indeed Glyphosphate, which is the major herbicide concerned, has had further restrictions placed upon it and faces bans in some countries due to fears of it being  carcinogenic. Interestingly Monsanto, makers of Glyphosphate, seem keen to be bought out by Bayer for $65 billion, it's big business alright.

[Farmer]

About blue: http://www.sciencealert.com/humans-couldn-t-even-see-the-colour-blue-until-modern-times-research-suggests

About gene transfer: http://www.wsj.com/articles/scientists-discover-how-genes-jump-between-species-1442512800

[Justinr]

About blue: http://www.sciencealert.com/humans-couldn-t-even-see-the-colour-blue-until-modern-times-research-suggests

About gene transfer: http://www.wsj.com/articles/scientists-discover-how-genes-jump-between-species-1442512800

Indeed you are right and I should have checked  first (a warning bell had tingled) but it is as good a reason to be wary of GM as any -

Horizontal gene transfer is the primary reason for the spread of antibiotic resistance in bacteria [5][6][7][8][9] and plays an important role in the evolution of bacteria that can degrade novel compounds such as human-created pesticides[10] and in the evolution, maintenance, and transmission of virulence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

GM may well be doomed to failure anyway -

In the 1990s, when the first genetically modified crops-such as glyphosate-resistant corn, canola, soybean and cotton—were introduced,[155][156] no glyphosate-resistant weeds existed.[157] By 2014, glyphosate-resistant weeds dominated herbicide-resistant research. At that time, 23 glyphosate-resistant species were found in 18 countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate

[Farmer]

Single-source agents are always going to be outdone by evolution in the long term, which is why recommendations exist for crop rotations and varied applications during off-season (i.e. to kill off the weeds which are becoming resistant to the primary herbicide to stop them evolving and becoming dominant).  It's just one part of an overall approach.

GM, per se, isn't a problem.  Problems only arise when we try to provide a simple, single solution to a complex problem and are then surprised that it doesn't always work or doesn't continue to work without us having to adapt the solution.  Again, evolution will master anything given time and the life cycle of some of these things is so short that evolution can happen very, very quickly - easily within a human generation and indeed often multiple times within that span.

Actually, I thought that the article about Blue was the more interesting of the two links I posted :-)

[Justinr]

Single-source agents are always going to be outdone by evolution in the long term, which is why recommendations exist for crop rotations and varied applications during off-season (i.e. to kill off the weeds which are becoming resistant to the primary herbicide to stop them evolving and becoming dominant).  It's just one part of an overall approach.

GM, per se, isn't a problem.  Problems only arise when we try to provide a simple, single solution to a complex problem and are then surprised that it doesn't always work or doesn't continue to work without us having to adapt the solution.  Again, evolution will master anything given time and the life cycle of some of these things is so short that evolution can happen very, very quickly - easily within a human generation and indeed often multiple times within that span.

Actually, I thought that the article about Blue was the more interesting of the two links I posted :-)

As a justification for GM that is pretty thin stuff, if the situation is that complex that we cannot ensure that it may be safely deployed without failures in the system or subsequent developments requiring further expense and risk then hadn't we better leave well alone? What you are saying is now that we are on the treadmill we are going to have to run ever faster to try and keep up. I appreciate that the vast majority of crops in America are GM but that is a problem that we as yet do not suffer and there are a large number of people who would wish to keep it that way which is why it is banned in most of Europe.

Some 19 member states had applied ahead of the deadline of 3 October to take advantage of rules introduced in April permitting individual member states and regions to ban cultivation of GM crops that have been judged by Europe’s regulators as posing no risk to human health or the environment.

Countries seizing the opportunity to opt out include Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Regions within member states have also joined the exodus, including Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in the UK, and Wallonia in Belgium.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28283-more-than-half-of-european-union-votes-to-ban-growing-gm-crops/

[ned]

I just love shooting film. I'm 55 and other than bringing my film to the drugstore like many of us did I never had any experience with the medium. Now, for the past 3 or 4 years I've been 100% film. I love processing both color and black and white on my Jobo, drum scanning on my ICG 365 and printing and making mats. I  shoot everything from an Olympic stylus epic, medium format and 4x5. For me, this is what photography is about.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Telecaster]

I tend to stay out of GM discussions since they tend to devolve into political/ideological clashes. So I'll just note that the human species put itself on the path to confronting such stuff the day an ancestor of ours first discovered that covering a wound with leaves from certain plants reduced or eliminated infection. Pathogens and antibodies.

I'm also fascinated by the degree to which vision is a learned phenomenon. I cannot see the uniqueness of the "odd man out" green square in the sciencealert article. (I did see a TV doc awhile back, featuring the tribe mentioned in the article, on this subject.)

BTW, here's what happens (see attached pic) when you color balance the green squares image via any of the 11 identical squares. Notice how the odd one now shows up? 

-Dave-