Post by: rabanito on December 06, 2018, 01:30:13 pm
I have the impression that those old things have lots of "body", of "substance", that I don't get with my digital camera
Of course I am inexperienced and maybe imagining things just because I don't master the techniques.
Any opinions?
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on December 06, 2018, 01:45:41 pm
Your questions remind me of the old joke/saying about fashion: "New is just a well-forgotten old." ;)
In other words, that horse (analog vs. digital) has already been beaten to death multiple times. But I understand it might be new to you, and I am sure some members here will gladly jump to the opportunity to rehash the old :)
Post by: rabanito on December 06, 2018, 01:55:06 pm
Ah, the beauty of getting a new member!
Your questions remind me of the old joke/saying about fashion: "New is just a well-forgotten old." ;)
In other words, that horse (analog vs. digital) has already been beaten to death multiple times. But I understand it might be new to you, and I am sure some members here will gladly jump to the opportunity to rehash the old :)
Well, I guessed that, yes.
But if I have to ask myself each time if any of my questions has already beaten to death several times by the more experienced, I have also to ask myself what am I doing in a forum on photography at all.
Don't you think? :)
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on December 06, 2018, 01:57:26 pm
... I have also to ask myself what am I doing in a forum on photography at all.
Oh, that one is easy: to show us more of your excellent photography.
Post by: Ivophoto on December 06, 2018, 02:24:38 pm
Well, I guessed that, yes.
But if I have to ask myself each time if any of my questions has already beaten to death several times by the more experienced, I have also to ask myself what am I doing in a forum on photography at all.
Don't you think? :)
You can take over my stick in the Lula newbies steeplechase.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on December 06, 2018, 02:34:35 pm
How awesome it is that man landed on the Moon
CDs seem to sound harsher vs. LPs (coincidentally, another analog vs. digital subject)
The Beatles vs. Rolling Stones
Etc.
;)
Post by: faberryman on December 06, 2018, 02:38:41 pm
You can take over my stick in the Lula newbies steeplechase.The analog vs. digital debate has been beaten to death for years, though usually the discussion does not turn around black and white. I shoot both film and digital in black and white. I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and am not interested in more words on the subject. If you want to advocate for one or the other medium, show us your prints.
Post by: Ivophoto on December 06, 2018, 02:40:26 pm
The analog vs. digital debate has been beaten to death for years, though usually the discussion does not turn around black and white. I shoot both film and digital in black and white. I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and am not interested in more words on the subject. If you want to advocate for one or the other mediums, show us your prints.
Why do you quote me on this? I’m not interested in the gear.
But I do recognize the newbie effect.
Post by: Ivophoto on December 06, 2018, 02:43:19 pm
Next on your to-do (discuss) list:
How awesome it is that man landed on the Moon
CDs seem to sound harsher vs. LPs (coincidentally, another analog vs. digital subject)
The Beatles vs. Rolling Stones
Etc.
;)
1: they didn’t. It is a hoax
2: maybe, but my luxman with lamp amplifier sound way better than any digital contraption.
3: the Bea... Who?
Post by: James Clark on December 06, 2018, 02:55:00 pm
Next on your to-do (discuss) list:
How awesome it is that man landed on the Moon
I can’t believe some people still believe this actually happened.
Post by: rabanito on December 06, 2018, 03:13:06 pm
I am in the forum to get my work criticized an look at what others do.
I never try to start arguments advocating this or that. I'm conscious of my weaknesses in photography.
I'd like the opinion of other people interested in photography, that's all. Like in a circle of knowledgeable friends who can help me in doing better something I like.
That's all
As for my prints, I softproof my images and in the end they look so as nearly as it goes in print.
You may like them or not.
So if you see what I publish here and you have a more or less well tuned monitor, that's it (more or less :-)
My question was anyhow out of curiosity. Just to chat.
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on December 06, 2018, 04:07:52 pm
Post by: faberryman on December 06, 2018, 04:42:58 pm
Why do you quote me on this? I’m not interested in the gear.Sorry. I hit Quote instead of Reply. I did not intend to quote you.
Post by: rabanito on December 06, 2018, 05:16:13 pm
Relax, rabanito, I was just teasing you. In a friendly way, I hope :)
No problem, Slobodan. I have a wide sense of humor :)
My Blitz and Donner weren't directed at you specifically ;)
I ordered the book you proposed, BTW. If it's not good I'll send you the bill
Post by: Rob C on December 06, 2018, 05:57:21 pm
I scanned recently some old negatives and worked on them in Ps.
I have the impression that those old things have lots of "body", of "substance", that I don't get with my digital camera
Of course I am inexperienced and maybe imagining things just because I don't master the techniques.
Any opinions?
Actually, you are probably right, which means that if you are, then so am I.
I feel very happy with what I can do in Photoshop, all the little tricks that turn nothing into a little bit of something, then I look at a simple print, heads of my two young kids together, that sits, framed, on the bedside table - a quick shot made on the end of a roll at the end of a commercial shoot, just before I unloaded the Hasselblad and took the stuff into the darkroom. A 10"x12" on double weight Kodak, grade 2, and even today, maybe forty-five years later, that print looks fabulous to me, the tonality - the feel of those tones, and it reduces my opinion about my digital stuff to crap. And no tricks out of a computer programmme; how dated! But how lovely. Hard to beat a good glaze!
Yes, film is different, and that shot was on Kodak's TXP 120, no fine-grain wonder, but overflowing with character on that format. Oddly, I never used it for 135 format; didn't like the look it gave on those smaller negatives.
Film had something best described as organic, which does not mean that I could look at images on the Internet and always know which was which, digital or film, just that for me, it worked beautifully, satisfied my eye, and that's what counted.
Post by: RBFritz on December 28, 2018, 06:56:08 pm
Post by: MMitchell on April 15, 2019, 09:31:32 pm
I scanned recently some old negatives and worked on them in Ps.
I have the impression that those old things have lots of "body", of "substance", that I don't get with my digital camera
Of course I am inexperienced and maybe imagining things just because I don't master the techniques.
Any opinions?
I find b&w film photography more interesting if the negatives are printed on an enlarger and developed with chemicals, i.e. 100 pct. analog from camera to print.
Post by: Rob C on April 16, 2019, 03:39:23 pm
I find b&w film photography more interesting if the negatives are printed on an enlarger and developed with chemicals, i.e. 100 pct. analog from camera to print.
But here's the thing: take street pictures as an excellent example of a huge difference between film and digital photography in my little scheme of things. I have admired great street for a long time, but would never dream of shooting it on film though I do try my hand at my own take on it now and then using digital. Why? Because I simply wouldn't print a street shot from either of the two mediums; that being so, why spend money on it? There's nothing about street that would make me think of hanging it on the wall of my pad. Yes, it certainly is a great genre for looking at between courses at solitary luncheons, but not for my wall. Now, were I to have an HC-B print of something of his that takes my fancy, that might be different, if only for historical reasons. But walls demand something that attracts the eye and adds positively to the room's ambience. Gilden & Co. wouldn't offer that at all. I'm prepared to accept that it could work quite well in some theme bar or restaurant, perhaps. And of course, in galleries and books.
Things you wouldn't spend money printing can still be very enjoyable viewed on screens of some sort. Perhaps that's something unique that digital has given us: an opportunity to make and enjoy types of imagery that have no other purpose but screen viewing. It doesn't imply some inferior status to such imagery at all, simply a different purpose and set of viewing values - those famous horses for courses.
Rob
Post by: RSL on April 16, 2019, 04:46:43 pm
Post by: rabanito on April 16, 2019, 05:42:14 pm
I agree with everything you said, Rob, but you left out one kind of viewing: book viewing. I have a ton of books on street photography with stuff from film days: HCB, Kertesz, Chim, Doisneau, Ronis, Brassaï, Evans, Erwitt, Riboud, Winogrand, Levitt, Frank... I treasure the prints in those books, though they're a long way from wall-display quality. One of the nice things about street is that you don't need top-of-the line prints, because street isn't about wall prints, as you made clear.
I'd say exactly the same
Post by: Rob C on April 17, 2019, 08:05:32 am
I also note that my post was later edited, but not that part.
That the second paragraph, wider in scope than just street, doesn't mention books specifically doesn't imply I am not in agreement with what the two of you say about books: I have such books in my collection, so I did put money where my mouth is.
:-)
Post by: RSL on April 17, 2019, 08:30:57 am
Post by: 32BT on April 17, 2019, 09:05:04 am
I still firmly believe that Rob's "The driver" should be printed larger than life and hung in the hallway at Tesla as a constant reminder that people are not machines, and machines are not people, despite any advances in AI. In that respect in signifies a bigger message for me in todays systemic era.
Similarly, HCB's behind the gare, can also be thought of as a jump into the deep, into the unknown. That could be a constant reminder that for each of us what the future holds is uncertain, and therefore we jump into the unknown every single day. One look at that image each morning makes you realise you might as well start doing whatever it is you wanted to do so badly, because the outcome will always be uncertain and thus perhaps the outcome is not as relevant in life as starting the actual journey.
Post by: RSL on April 17, 2019, 09:11:13 am
Post by: rabanito on April 17, 2019, 09:27:42 am
Russ, Rabanito: no, at the end of my first paragraph I did mention books as being right/appropriate for street shooting work.
:-)
Sorry Rob. My fault.
In the back of my mind I thought we all agreed.
Call it laziness ... :(
Post by: Rob C on April 17, 2019, 09:35:05 am
There are streetpictures I would like on my wall, because they can be a reminder of what it means to struggle through life. If I had the dough, I'd also consider purchasing "for the love of god". Not that I think Damien is the man to beat, but that piece would remind you very succinctly of the usefulness of blindly chasing riches.
I still firmly believe that Rob's "The driver" should be printed larger than life and hung in the hallway at Tesla as a constant reminder that people are not machines, and machines are not people, despite any advances in AI. In that respect in signifies a bigger message for me in todays systemic era.
Similarly, HCB's behind the gare, can also be thought of as a jump into the deep, into the unknown. That could be a constant reminder that for each of us what the future holds is uncertain, and therefore we jump into the unknown every single day. One look at that image each morning makes you realise you might as well start doing whatever it is you wanted to do so badly, because the outcome will always be uncertain and thus perhaps the outcome is not as relevant in life as starting the actual journey.
Thanks, Oscar; it's not every day that somebody remembers a particular picture of mine! Makes me feel vindicated, in a sort of happy way.
Rob
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 17, 2019, 09:39:02 am
... somebody remembers a particular picture of mine!...
My aging memory apparently is no match for Oscar’s, so can we see that picture again, here, please?
Post by: Rob C on April 17, 2019, 12:57:39 pm
My aging memory apparently is no match for Oscar’s, so can we see that picture again, here, please?
Okay, here it is, Slobodan:
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 17, 2019, 01:19:28 pm
Okay, here it is, Slobodan:
You take your bandana off when in the car? ;)
Post by: Rob C on April 17, 2019, 01:38:13 pm
You take your bandana off when in the car? ;)
That would have been some technically brilliant selfie!
The bandana has been consigned to history. My better half made it for me from some left-over material from something she'd made for the apartment. Sadly, wear and tear has rendered it frayed and reduced to one ragged thickness at the front, and the dire effects of radiation and my battles to fight off further facial surgery have convinced me that I'm better off with something that includes a shade for the eyes, about which I already have concerns...
:-)
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on April 17, 2019, 01:53:13 pm
One of many of yours.
Post by: RSL on April 17, 2019, 02:11:32 pm
Post by: Rob C on April 17, 2019, 02:26:04 pm
I never will understand the world post the year 2000.
:-)
Post by: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 17, 2019, 03:01:10 pm
...paying attention when attention is so obviously sought...
Nicely and succinctly put, as always, Rob.
Post by: RSL on April 17, 2019, 03:02:21 pm
I never will understand the world post the year 2000.
I understand it, but I wish I didn't.
Post by: Rob C on April 17, 2019, 04:55:02 pm
:-)
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on April 17, 2019, 05:24:54 pm
There are some intelligent people here in LuLa.Amen and +1 to all youse guys!
:-)
Post by: KLaban on April 18, 2019, 03:30:13 am
Okay, here it is, Slobodan:
(https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=127920.0;attach=194915;image)
Don't know how I missed this first time around but glad to have caught up with it now!
Post by: Rob C on April 18, 2019, 04:13:08 am
Don't know how I missed this first time around but glad to have caught up with it now!
Well, it's not Maybelline!
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=msabellene+chuick+berry&&view=detail&mid=B2983B49E51F8E4CC520B2983B49E51F8E4CC520&&FORM=VDRVRV
;-)