[Alt-photo] Re: Process or filter?

Mark Nelson ender100 at aol.com
Wed Mar 27 01:48:12 UTC 2013

Actually I agree with his primary point.  The final object you come up with will not be great, regardless of how well you may have mastered a process if the image sucks.  Just because a mediocre image is printed in platinum doesn't make it great.

However, I love the nuances that many alt processes may add to an image.  And of course there are the look and feel of the fine papers.

And there is also the fun of mastering a process and using it to make prints, but that is something else.

Or am I missing something?

Best Wishes,
Mark Nelson

Welcome to the Precision Digital Negatives Home!
PDNPrint : Precision Digital Negatives Forum
Mark I. Nelson Photography - Welcome

On Mar 26, 2013, at 2:36 PM, "Don Sweet" <don at sweetlegal.co.nz> wrote:

> I wonder if Colberg's comments might might have been less confronting if had
> used a term other than "filters".  That choice of word (evidently derived
> from some photoshop-style pixel-manipulating program) seems almost
> deliberately provocative.  If he had talked instead in terms of "surfaces",
> or more aptly perhaps "screens", then some of his opinions would give no
> offence, and might even be though self-evident.  His observation as to the
> lack of strict correspondence between image and object is an example.
> Don Sweet
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kees Brandenburg" <workshops at polychrome.nl>
> To: <alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 10:42 PM
> Subject: [Alt-photo] Process or filter?
>> An interesting view on the status of process and object.
>> http://jmcolberg.com/weblog/extended/archives/on_process/
>> kees
>> _______________________________________________
>> Alt-photo-process-list | lists.altphotolist.org/mailman/listinfo
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | lists.altphotolist.org/mailman/listinfo

More information about the Alt-photo-process-list mailing list