>, I have 9 separate frames that I need to work with ( tilt/shift's
>left/middle/right frames, then a shadow, midtone, highlight exposure for
>each one). I'm finding that I'm enjoying a lot more freedom with the
>digital camera, and it's resulted in many more keepers. But even with all
>that work, I still find I spend less time with the digital darkroom
>getting my final image, than I did in my chemical darkroom (contrast/color
>masking was always a pain, and separation negatives even more so)
It's pretty amazing to see the different methods that each person chooses
to work in.
I have images that I'm working on that I'm fairly sure will make a complete
circuit by the time I'm done with them.. film capture, scan, photoshop,
digital output, rephotograph then enlarge the neg for printing...
Where do these crazy ideas on how something *must* look come from anyway??
Sometimes I too want to go back to just one camera, one printing method and
live life a little simpler.
Cheers,
Ian
>
>
>
>Do we make value judgements on the quality or legitimacy of an image based
>on the format or medium that it's made with? Rhetorical question. Is an
>8X10 original of a mundane or mediocre image inherently more legit than a
>35mm original of a really inspired image? If the process is simple is it
>less artistic than an arcane and labor intensive one?
>
>questions, questions, questions....
>
>
> Jim
>
Received on Tue Apr 13 17:01:09 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 05/14/04-02:14:31 PM Z CST