Re: Users of digital negatives
I loved your answer. Thank you. You are quite right about digital throwing a
monkey wrench into the works. All that time and valuable experience gained
in the darkroom is of little value now. Many of my colleagues who made
'straight' prints, not alt processes prints, have now dumped their darkrooms
AND have given up on digital as being too hard (although this is rarely
actually expressed) and instead pay someone else to make their big, digital
prints. Students even seem willing to pay a lab for (often crummy) prints
for their assesment, which, speaking as a
do-absolutely-everything-yourself-hybrid-girl, is something I don't
understand at all.
You make a very interesting point Eric - about digital substrates and inks
changing all the time, by suggesting that this situation is in fact not too
different to our analogue nearly-past of unreliable film and chemical supply
or inconsistent outcomes and, as well, the deletion of good film stocks.
Everyone has offered a slightly different take on this question - and I
thank you all. Great stuff.
----- Original Message -----
From: "EJN Photo"
Subject: RE: Users of digital negatives
> Catherine, It has thrown a monkey wrench in the whole process. All the
> Kodak, Ilford, and Agfa material that I spent years learning 4125, 4127,
> Tech Pan, and countless hours of mastery are all for not; after which came
> all the imitators trying to fill a void that was an ever shrinking market.
> Trying to do printing with a shirking and inconsistent film supply while
> maintaining high standards is no fun and very costly. What was to say that
> your efforts would prove to be useable in one or two months let a lone
> several decades? Having been told to give up film back in the late 70's
> while going to college in the heart of computers, Silicon Valley, it was
> hard to pay attention to the coming of the digital process. But when would
> it become worthy or serious consideration? Here we are nearing the end of
> the 1st decade of the new century and the inkjet market is as unsettled as
> the large format film industry; one fighting to stay alive and the other
> struggling through the early years of perfecting its course. Flexibility
> the name of the game. Our papers have changed, the process to make the
> negatives has changed and still the process remains the same.
> What has it done for imagery? With the great ability to fix the
> and elements of the image, digital has opened up the final print to many
> more printers. You no longer have to have a precisely crafted negative
> one shot. You have many chances to get it right and if you mess up your
> you just make a new one. That is if the ink is still the same, the
> is still the same, ...
> Day after day the image making instruments and substrates change so
> that without the internets speed to share, a book or written manual
> marginally useful. So hold on tight and get out your wallets
> Just a few thoughts,