Digital BW, The Print

Your experience is very different from mine, here in Australia. I know many
people who enter international photo competitions with A3+ inkjet prints.
All our local clubs put them up with the 'silver' photos for judging - in
fact, many judges can't even tell which photos are digital and which are
chemical.

The only rules I know of are that photos in Nature and Photojournalism
categories can't have major manipulations done to them. Colour/contrast
correction and spot removal is OK, but moving a tree or cloning out power
lines is not OK. But I haven't heard anyone ever complain about inkjet
prints in a competition - if they did, we would just get our digital files
printed photographically anyway!

Here's a great page from the Australian Federation of Camera Clubs:
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/FCC/generalinfo.html#competition

Hope this helps you educate your clubs!

Darren.

-----Original Message-----

Hollo Digital Eyes,

I'm truly in this "business" Piezo, Curves , pigmented color, and Dye,
I'm happy with it..My hasselblades and my three Epson 1290's (1280 in 
US) and my minolta multi pro etc MF scanner!

However I am honest and in my photoclubs now I am regarded as 
an "experimental photographer" - I made certainly good prints on the 
epsons.

*But* I left those lovely photoclubs of mine - as I was only allowed 
to be in the corner of "experimental photoes" - and I can't and have 
no power left to defend my photoes ("Epson experimental print - that 
is!!!???)

At start I did say nothing - just put them in the B/W and color-
section - and did *very* *very* good --UNTIL I told them my technics -
and that was nothing odd about it - about the same job as in the 
darkroom - ahh .. you know all this!

Being member of two Photoclubs - suddenly they told me to keep the 
groups in competision or exhibition "CLEAN" - that is that I was put 
in the corner as an "experimental photographer" in the "left corner".

I'm now a passive member of those clubs doing it on my own - and plan 
to make my own exhibitions in the future. If I have the power to do 
that alone....Most of You certainly know the job with that.
By being a passiv member I contribute anyhow to yhe "youngsters" and 
others interested in the *PICTURE*.

What do You feel - is all photography to be "cleaned out" in silver 
only and true "wet" darkroom colorphotoes?

I have a wet darkroom but mostly now for developing films and helping 
my teenagers to learn "photography" as my father tuoght me!

In a sence I feel they are right - if only the "technic" and material 
used are the main factor....but stop....hmmmm...the *pic*??????

But for me - there has been only one thing the whole time - the 
*picture* - and that *picture* shall be placed under the technic 
used - any time.

OK - before that - I was also against any photocompetision!
No art can compete!
Wich one is best Mozart, Bethoven, Beatles ..etc..thing??? For me it 
like placing the art of *picture* under other expressive arts. It 
make photographing rediculuos compared to other artforms.
But that's another issue - however as important as the "experimental 
shelf" as I was put into.

Some photoclubs near Copenhagen???? - that can take me for an 
ordinary photographer ( I live in Sweden but has only two hours to 
get there!)

I'm 55++ and have done film as well - and have temper and a will to 
express myself through the *picture* still or moving!
I also do drawings! Nothing there is "experimental" for sure.

Are not this photclubs doing the art of picture - ridiculous???
Lowering the common feeling for a *picture* taken by an photographer!

Fiat Lux (Let There be Light!)

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Moderator of just openened Minolta Multi Pro Yahoo group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/multipro 
WBG-film
Sweden


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for that answer Darren,

You are the only one that dared to take this up - nice of You!

I have now been in contact with other photclubs - but negative -
it's some sort of a feeling from their side "we are loosing control".

The wast majority here - is somewhat looking at it as - "the computer 
does the job"...."It is't fair"....."How can I compete with that".

I have earlier stated that every picture (I use that word here!) 
schould and must be regarded as superior to the method of getting it!
And - there I am!

I do not think I'm alone - at least in Europe! We are plenty - if 
taken the "quad" community in whole!
 
However I have a feeling that this a general question and ought to be 
discussed - how to handle this issue????

In other artforms this kind of questions is not a big issue!
I also do some designing and drawings - there we not even discuss the 
paper - we buy the best - period!

Is it so - that *the* photographing and it's workflows stopped in the 
thirties - and not even the roaring "1968" did schange that.

Did photography and picture making stop with Anselm Adams etc....???

I have a bad feeling in my stomach.....that the history of 
photography has some *stops* - and that tradisional photographing 
is defending itself - in a way not seen in any other artform???

While digital photography is on the whole internet and accepted and 
given headlines - the way to reach a *good* picture by film and a
3000$ scanner and "carbon or color pigment" is not accepted for the 
artists using an Epson to print it and put it in public places.

Is just for the journalism to get it printed in the papers - or those 
chutting up and do the "show" to be accepted in the big run.

We all here talk about longlivity of papers , wich method curves vs 
Cone - but nonone telling the problems and acceptance of our methods!
Ok I have had worse things than cloggs - greenies etc etc

But how do *You* handle it - when it comes to presentations of *Your* 
pictures - when they ask for *Your* workflows to reach that *Very* 
picture!

Help me to get rid of that feeling in my stomach - and not to be 
placed among those pictures placed in "experimental photographing"!

Is it only You Darren that had an positive responce to answer this 
questions.

Or did we bed for it - by having "photo contests"?
The more "suger" the better photo?

Help!!!!



Bo Wrangborg
Moderator of "Minolta Multi Pro Forum" at Yahoo!
MF-photographer 55++ years old.
Sweden


 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Darren Collins" 
<collinda@n...> wrote:
> Your experience is very different from mine, here in Australia. I 
know many
> people who enter international photo competitions with A3+ inkjet 
prints.
> All our local clubs put them up with the 'silver' photos for 
judging - in
> fact, many judges can't even tell which photos are digital and 
which are
> chemical.
> 
> The only rules I know of are that photos in Nature and 
Photojournalism
> categories can't have major manipulations done to them. 
Colour/contrast
> correction and spot removal is OK, but moving a tree or cloning out 
power
> lines is not OK. But I haven't heard anyone ever complain about 
inkjet
> prints in a competition - if they did, we would just get our 
digital files
> printed photographically anyway!
> 
> Here's a great page from the Australian Federation of Camera Clubs:
> 
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/FCC/generalinfo.html#competition
> 
> Hope this helps you educate your clubs!
> 
> Darren.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> 
> Hollo Digital Eyes,
> 
> I'm truly in this "business" Piezo, Curves , pigmented color, and 
Dye,
> I'm happy with it..My hasselblades and my three Epson 1290's (1280 
in 
> US) and my minolta multi pro etc MF scanner!
> 
> However I am honest and in my photoclubs now I am regarded as 
> an "experimental photographer" - I made certainly good prints on 
the 
> epsons.
> 
> *But* I left those lovely photoclubs of mine - as I was only 
allowed 
> to be in the corner of "experimental photoes" - and I can't and 
have 
> no power left to defend my photoes ("Epson experimental print - 
that 
> is!!!???)
> 
> At start I did say nothing - just put them in the B/W and color-
> section - and did *very* *very* good --UNTIL I told them my 
technics -
> and that was nothing odd about it - about the same job as in the 
> darkroom - ahh .. you know all this!
> 
> Being member of two Photoclubs - suddenly they told me to keep the 
> groups in competision or exhibition "CLEAN" - that is that I was 
put 
> in the corner as an "experimental photographer" in the "left 
corner".
> 
> I'm now a passive member of those clubs doing it on my own - and 
plan 
> to make my own exhibitions in the future. If I have the power to do 
> that alone....Most of You certainly know the job with that.
> By being a passiv member I contribute anyhow to yhe "youngsters" 
and 
> others interested in the *PICTURE*.
> 
> What do You feel - is all photography to be "cleaned out" in silver 
> only and true "wet" darkroom colorphotoes?
> 
> I have a wet darkroom but mostly now for developing films and 
helping 
> my teenagers to learn "photography" as my father tuoght me!
> 
> In a sence I feel they are right - if only the "technic" and 
material 
> used are the main factor....but stop....hmmmm...the *pic*??????
> 
> But for me - there has been only one thing the whole time - the 
> *picture* - and that *picture* shall be placed under the technic 
> used - any time.
> 
> OK - before that - I was also against any photocompetision!
> No art can compete!
> Wich one is best Mozart, Bethoven, Beatles ..etc..thing??? For me 
it 
> like placing the art of *picture* under other expressive arts. It 
> make photographing rediculuos compared to other artforms.
> But that's another issue - however as important as 
the "experimental 
> shelf" as I was put into.
> 
> Some photoclubs near Copenhagen???? - that can take me for an 
> ordinary photographer ( I live in Sweden but has only two hours to 
> get there!)
> 
> I'm 55++ and have done film as well - and have temper and a will to 
> express myself through the *picture* still or moving!
> I also do drawings! Nothing there is "experimental" for sure.
> 
> Are not this photclubs doing the art of picture - ridiculous???
> Lowering the common feeling for a *picture* taken by an 
photographer!

> 
> Fiat Lux (Let There be Light!)
> 
> Regards
> Bo Wrangborg
> Moderator of just openened Minolta Multi Pro Yahoo group
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/multipro 
> WBG-film
> Sweden
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I agree with you that this whole digital vs. film, inkjet vs. 'wet' prints
competition is annoying. I am lucky that it doesn't seem as severe here as
it does in your country, Bo.

A lot of film people are scared of what they don't understand. They spend
long hours trying to take and develop the perfect image, and they think that
we can just snap off any old image and turn it into a competition winner
using Photoshop. They really don't understand the digital process. It's not
the same as film, but it is just as complicated.

Many of these traditional photographers have spent a large part of their
lifetime learning their craft, and they fear that digital techniques devalue
their hard-earned skills. I can understand their feelings, but this fear
stems from ignorance. I call it 'fear of the dark'.

Instead of arguing with them, I just try to create the best images I can
with the equipment and skills I have. I enjoy creating an image that gets
people talking and asking questions about digital techniques. I also enjoy
learning photography techniques off the film people and applying them to my
digital work. Composition, colour, lighting, framing, etc are the same for
us all.

Don't be too worried about being relegated to the 'experimental' group.
Enjoy it there, and create images that impress people. They'll start to ask
you questions, especially the ones thinking of going digital. The more
people you 'convert', the better the competition will get in your category.
And then they'll finally start to appreciate your efforts when they
comprehend the reality of creating digital images. You might even be able to
recruit new club members that hadn't joined in the past because they thought
it was only for film guys.

It's only a matter of time until the digital photographers outnumber the
traditional photographers in camera clubs. You and I have the advantage of
being there at the start, so we're likely to be the ones that the club will
come to for advice when the weight of numbers forces them to reconsider
their rules. If that doesn't happen as soon as you'd like, at least you'll
have met a few more digital photographers who might be interested in forming
a new club (or a special interest group within your current club) with you.

Don't forget that you can always enter prints in international competitions,
too. The local club should keep you informed of upcoming events (mine does),
and most of the internationals are fine with digital prints nowadays.
Imagine coming back to your club with an international prize, when they
won't even let you compete in their normal competitions! That'll show them
how backwards they are!

I hope this helps you feel more positive about the future of digital
photography. It's the film guys that should be feeling depressed about their
dying craft!

Darren.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Darren,
I quote you:

"It's the film guys that should be feeling depressed about their
dying craft!

Darren."

End Quot!

Those words gave me the fighting spirit - I have temper - good and 
bad - (not always good for me!) but out of one out of sixtyfour in my 
main Club -
Yes Yes - - some of them not admitting they buoght an Olympus Digital 
Camera - excause "for the fun and and family" - I killed some of them 
showing prints in b/w quad in 8x10 by my Sony DSP 707 - I might be to 
hard on them - but they don't call me to get an advice, they still 
say "for family".

Then showing my Hasselblade - Minolta multi Pro scaned pictures - 
Photoshop - Quad / Piezo on my three 1290's - they stop talking - I'm 
not clean.

"I'm disturbing equilibrium there - for sure!" But having "temper" it 
is not easy to get the arguments to fit in!

Telling them what it costs, telling them about Hahnemülle, telling 
them the hours to get there - they go for the coffee table - talking 
about there latest Nikonzooms (I hate zooms -  zooms are indeed 
not "clean" to me - that's for journalism../smile/)
(Hit some toes there....you are welcome...) 

I'm not going passiv anylonger - there is something going to happen 
at that club - also having several pros. working for different 
magazines and papers (I know they go digital - I have seen them in 
action Canon and Nikon Dig. cameras....the lences are the same...but 
at the Club..silence...talking with them .... silver ... 
fix ...HD11..Rodinal....old times...etc etc.."forced to by their 
employer"..etc..etc)

Hi - I don't get it!

Next time I'll speak load - and after that ...I'll speak load .....
*and* now in the summer I'll prepare a full collection of 
*experimental* photos - make them as big as I can - fill the walls as 
much as I can.

I'll try to take over the show /smile/ .... and with my 
temper....there will be *no* silence!

I'll occupy the coffee table - and if they don't like my presence
there - they are forced to go to the *experimental photo wall* /smile/

Thanks Darren - we are few doing quad/piezo - but You gave me the 
spirit to fight for it.

My wife's advice - "don't go there anylonger if You feel bad - You 
know you temper!" has changed - I'll use that "temper" insted - I'll 
also show them my drawings and sketches in 0.80-1.20 m in dimension 
to do it realy experimental I'll do the same scetches as my 
*experimental photos* but as said larger than A3+.

Thanks Darren - I'll fight for it - let my hart not beat too hard!


Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Moderator "multipro" at Yahoo
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/multipro  



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Darren Collins" 
<collinda@n...> wrote:
> I agree with you that this whole digital vs. film, inkjet vs. 'wet' 
prints
> competition is annoying. I am lucky that it doesn't seem as severe 
here as
> it does in your country, Bo.
> 
> A lot of film people are scared of what they don't understand. They 
spend
> long hours trying to take and develop the perfect image, and they 
think that
> we can just snap off any old image and turn it into a competition 
winner
> using Photoshop. They really don't understand the digital process. 
It's not
> the same as film, but it is just as complicated.
> 
> Many of these traditional photographers have spent a large part of 
their
> lifetime learning their craft, and they fear that digital 
techniques devalue
> their hard-earned skills. I can understand their feelings, but this 
fear
> stems from ignorance. I call it 'fear of the dark'.
> 
> Instead of arguing with them, I just try to create the best images 
I can
> with the equipment and skills I have. I enjoy creating an image 
that gets
> people talking and asking questions about digital techniques. I 
also enjoy
> learning photography techniques off the film people and applying 
them to my
> digital work. Composition, colour, lighting, framing, etc are the 
same for
> us all.
> 
> Don't be too worried about being relegated to the 'experimental' 
group.
> Enjoy it there, and create images that impress people. They'll 
start to ask
> you questions, especially the ones thinking of going digital. The 
more
> people you 'convert', the better the competition will get in your 
category.
> And then they'll finally start to appreciate your efforts when they
> comprehend the reality of creating digital images. You might even 
be able to
> recruit new club members that hadn't joined in the past because 
they thought
> it was only for film guys.
> 
> It's only a matter of time until the digital photographers 
outnumber the
> traditional photographers in camera clubs. You and I have the 
advantage of
> being there at the start, so we're likely to be the ones that the 
club will
> come to for advice when the weight of numbers forces them to 
reconsider
> their rules. If that doesn't happen as soon as you'd like, at least 
you'll
> have met a few more digital photographers who might be interested 
in forming
> a new club (or a special interest group within your current club) 
with you.
> 
> Don't forget that you can always enter prints in international 
competitions,
> too. The local club should keep you informed of upcoming events 
(mine does),
> and most of the internationals are fine with digital prints 
nowadays.
> Imagine coming back to your club with an international prize, when 
they
> won't even let you compete in their normal competitions! That'll 
show them
> how backwards they are!
> 
> I hope this helps you feel more positive about the future of digital
> photography. It's the film guys that should be feeling depressed 
about their

> dying craft!
> 
> Darren.
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yow! Remind me never to get on the wrong side of you!

Most importantly of all - have fun doing it.

Darren.

-----Original Message-----
From: sm7bxd [mailto:sm7bxd@...]
Sent: Thursday, 6 June 2002 1:07 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Clubs, Experimental photo..hmmmm?????


Darren,
I quote you:

"It's the film guys that should be feeling depressed about their
dying craft!

Darren."

End Quot!

Those words gave me the fighting spirit - I have temper - good and 
bad - (not always good for me!) but out of one out of sixtyfour in my 
main Club -
Yes Yes - - some of them not admitting they buoght an Olympus Digital 
Camera - excause "for the fun and and family" - I killed some of them 
showing prints in b/w quad in 8x10 by my Sony DSP 707 - I might be to 
hard on them - but they don't call me to get an advice, they still 
say "for family".

Then showing my Hasselblade - Minolta multi Pro scaned pictures - 
Photoshop - Quad / Piezo on my three 1290's - they stop talking - I'm 
not clean.

"I'm disturbing equilibrium there - for sure!" But having "temper" it 
is not easy to get the arguments to fit in!

Telling them what it costs, telling them about Hahnemülle, telling 
them the hours to get there - they go for the coffee table - talking 
about there latest Nikonzooms (I hate zooms -  zooms are indeed 
not "clean" to me - that's for journalism../smile/)
(Hit some toes there....you are welcome...) 

I'm not going passiv anylonger - there is something going to happen 
at that club - also having several pros. working for different 
magazines and papers (I know they go digital - I have seen them in 
action Canon and Nikon Dig. cameras....the lences are the same...but 
at the Club..silence...talking with them .... silver ... 
fix ...HD11..Rodinal....old times...etc etc.."forced to by their 
employer"..etc..etc)

Hi - I don't get it!

Next time I'll speak load - and after that ...I'll speak load .....
*and* now in the summer I'll prepare a full collection of 
*experimental* photos - make them as big as I can - fill the walls as 
much as I can.

I'll try to take over the show /smile/ .... and with my 
temper....there will be *no* silence!

I'll occupy the coffee table - and if they don't like my presence
there - they are forced to go to the *experimental photo wall* /smile/

Thanks Darren - we are few doing quad/piezo - but You gave me the 
spirit to fight for it.

My wife's advice - "don't go there anylonger if You feel bad - You 
know you temper!" has changed - I'll use that "temper" insted - I'll 
also show them my drawings and sketches in 0.80-1.20 m in dimension 
to do it realy experimental I'll do the same scetches as my 
*experimental photos* but as said larger than A3+.

Thanks Darren - I'll fight for it - let my hart not beat too hard!


Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Moderator "multipro" at Yahoo
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/multipro  


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Darren,

for sure You will not get on the wrong side of me!
You are at the opposit side of the world if living in Australia you 
are at both sides of me! I'm from Sweden - that is!

/smile/

Regards
Bo



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Darren Collins" 
<collinda@n...> wrote:
> Yow! Remind me never to get on the wrong side of you!
> 
> Most importantly of all - have fun doing it.
> 
> Darren.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sm7bxd [mailto:sm7bxd@y...]
> Sent: Thursday, 6 June 2002 1:07 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y...
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Clubs, Experimental photo..hmmmm?????
> 
> 
> Darren,
> I quote you:
> 
> "It's the film guys that should be feeling depressed about their
> dying craft!
> 
> Darren."
> 
> End Quot!
> 
> Those words gave me the fighting spirit - I have temper - good and 
> bad - (not always good for me!) but out of one out of sixtyfour in 
my 
> main Club -
> Yes Yes - - some of them not admitting they buoght an Olympus 
Digital 
> Camera - excause "for the fun and and family" - I killed some of 
them 
> showing prints in b/w quad in 8x10 by my Sony DSP 707 - I might be 
to 
> hard on them - but they don't call me to get an advice, they still 
> say "for family".
> 
> Then showing my Hasselblade - Minolta multi Pro scaned pictures - 
> Photoshop - Quad / Piezo on my three 1290's - they stop talking - 
I'm 
> not clean.
> 
> "I'm disturbing equilibrium there - for sure!" But having "temper" 
it 
> is not easy to get the arguments to fit in!
> 
> Telling them what it costs, telling them about Hahnemülle, telling 
> them the hours to get there - they go for the coffee table - 
talking 
> about there latest Nikonzooms (I hate zooms -  zooms are indeed 
> not "clean" to me - that's for journalism../smile/)
> (Hit some toes there....you are welcome...) 
> 
> I'm not going passiv anylonger - there is something going to happen 
> at that club - also having several pros. working for different 
> magazines and papers (I know they go digital - I have seen them in 
> action Canon and Nikon Dig. cameras....the lences are the 
same...but 
> at the Club..silence...talking with them .... silver ... 
> fix ...HD11..Rodinal....old times...etc etc.."forced to by their 
> employer"..etc..etc)
> 
> Hi - I don't get it!
> 
> Next time I'll speak load - and after that ...I'll speak load .....
> *and* now in the summer I'll prepare a full collection of 
> *experimental* photos - make them as big as I can - fill the walls 
as 
> much as I can.
> 
> I'll try to take over the show /smile/ .... and with my 
> temper....there will be *no* silence!
> 
> I'll occupy the coffee table - and if they don't like my presence
> there - they are forced to go to the *experimental photo 
wall* /smile/
> 
> Thanks Darren - we are few doing quad/piezo - but You gave me the 
> spirit to fight for it.
> 
> My wife's advice - "don't go there anylonger if You feel bad - You 
> know you temper!" has changed - I'll use that "temper" insted - 
I'll 

> also show them my drawings and sketches in 0.80-1.20 m in dimension 
> to do it realy experimental I'll do the same scetches as my 
> *experimental photos* but as said larger than A3+.
> 
> Thanks Darren - I'll fight for it - let my hart not beat too hard!
> 
> 
> Regards
> Bo Wrangborg
> Moderator "multipro" at Yahoo
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/multipro  
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

sm7bxd wrote:

>- talking 
>about there latest Nikonzooms (I hate zooms -  zooms are indeed 
>not "clean" to me - that's for journalism../smile/)
>(Hit some toes there....you are welcome...) 
>
>
 

 OK Bo..

What's wrong with zooms?

Unless you need a lens faster than 2.8 there is very little gained by 
using a prime lens (assuming you are using top quality lenses - NOT 
variable F stop consumer level stuff)..

And what's wrong with photojournalism?  

In the US it has become one of the most popular styles of wedding 
imagery... It has produced brilliant photographers/artists from Eugene 
Smith to Robert Frank to Margaret Bourke-White to Alfred Eisenstaedt... 
Salgado, Karsh, Stieglitz..   and the gorgeous images they have brought 
us...  And before we even go there.. photojournalism does NOT equal 
paprazzzi...

[Keith]
 
 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Keith wrote

> And what's wrong with photojournalism?
>
> In the US it has become one of the most popular styles of wedding
> imagery... It has produced brilliant photographers/artists from Eugene
> Smith to Robert Frank to Margaret Bourke-White to Alfred Eisenstaedt...
> Salgado, Karsh, Stieglitz..

Keith: Do you mean Yousef Karsh (Canadian portrait photographer, born 1908 in
Armenia)? If so, what does his work have to do with photojournalism?

Peter Marquis-Kyle

Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote:

>
>Keith: Do you mean Yousef Karsh (Canadian portrait photographer, born 1908 in
>Armenia)? 
>

YUP..

>If so, what does his work have to do with photojournalism?
>
Photo-j is not just catching events... it is also about creating 
interesting and lasting imagery of newsmakers as well (feature and 
portraiture pics)...

Check out the imagery of White House Photogs and many magazine covers 
(portraiture style).. the moody, dark style of lighting used by Karsh 
for many of his images have become a basic staple of a good 
photojournalist's tools..  Of course, they are mere imitations of the 
original...

Of course, to be clearer, I should have set out Karsh,  as more an 
influence on pj than blurring the line, by implying he was part of pj..

others like Cartier-Bresson, Leibowitz (whose work I dislike), Capa, et. 
al. will fill in the blank nicely though.. ;-)


[Keith]
 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi - You got it right,

There is nothing wrong with photojournalism - it's a job for a 
photographer needing an zoom to get that very picture without
changing lens at all, many with 800 ASA films - I have done it myself.

That's why I said - what I said - Zooms and photojournalism hangs 
toghther not! Often handheld, often in a hurry, to catch up all those
assignments to make his/hers living. Good pictures had been taken - 
but how many lost - when the winder rips the film through the 
camerahouse!

Zoom is a splended tool for a splendid photournalist - not right??
Zoom is also not a splended tool for 100 ASA trying to do fineart.
Zooms are bad because - try to buy one for a deasent price for an 
Hasselblade - did you see one of those?

Did You ever see a zoom an a LF-camera? 

And those cameras *could* certainly stand a zoom better than 35 mm 
camera.....or are they that good now...that I shall window out 
everything over 35 mm???

I own zooms as well - but that is for vaccation when traveling light 
with my 35 mm camera. But is that little filmpiece on a 35 mm camera 
best toghether with a zoom?

Ah - you know what I mean - and all of this is out of topics for this
forum - not? And out of topics of my main question:
_____________________________________________________

My question was about "Is quad, PIEZO and color pigment to be 
regarded as "experimental" photo?
___________________________________________________
(For those who forgot this was the real topic of this inlay!)

And You starts arguing about the situation where I mensioned the Word 
zoom in a sence - that was the beginners at my photoclub was using 
zooms and only have one camerahouse not able to switch film - that 
might be more important in certain situations!
That was a picture of how it looked at my photoclub - where I'm 
regarded as a stranger since the computer does the picture 
automaticly for me - just like the autofocus of those Nikon 
Zoomlenses - it was playing with words - to give you a certain 
feeling.

But one good fellow did understand what i meant - and that good 
answer came from Áustralia. 

Read that one!

The others here either don't care or don't want to hold that hot 
potatoe!
I have a feeling that most hang their quads/Piezo next to the 
siverphotos - not saying a word!

This was also written with some satir - but who cares?
In what legue do Quad/Pizo play - none cares!
Strange indeed! Remarkable!


Fiat Lux!

Bo Wrangborg
Sweden
Moderator "Minolta Multi Pro" at Yahoo  




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Editor P.O.V. Image 
Service" <editor@p...> wrote:
> Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote:
> 
> >
> >Keith: Do you mean Yousef Karsh (Canadian portrait photographer, 
born 1908 in
> >Armenia)? 
> >
> 
> YUP..
> 
> >If so, what does his work have to do with photojournalism?
> >
> Photo-j is not just catching events... it is also about creating 
> interesting and lasting imagery of newsmakers as well (feature and 
> portraiture pics)...
> 
> Check out the imagery of White House Photogs and many magazine 
covers 
> (portraiture style).. the moody, dark style of lighting used by 
Karsh 
> for many of his images have become a basic staple of a good 
> photojournalist's tools..  Of course, they are mere imitations of 
the 
> original...
> 
> Of course, to be clearer, I should have set out Karsh,  as more an 
> influence on pj than blurring the line, by implying he was part of 
pj..
> 
> others like Cartier-Bresson, Leibowitz (whose work I dislike), 
Capa, et. 

> al. will fill in the blank nicely though.. ;-)
> 
> 
> [Keith]
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

After spending thousands on digital equipment (piezo, printers, 
profiling equip., drum scanner etc..) I have no money left for zooms. 
But I wish I did; they will be my next purchase. I've taken quite a few 
weddings recently and have decided that changing lenses too fast is 
putting too much wear on my cameras (not to mention having to lug 
around many pounds for a everything)  For 35mm zooms are great, but for 
anything larger (like the Hassys) you end up with a lens that is twice 
as big, heavy, and expensive. Arguing about that is like arguing about 
film speed everyone should use; you use what you need to for your 
situation.

As far as the whole "experimental" vs standard in contests and salons, 
That surprises me, since all the labs here now print everything (done 
by machine that is) digitally. If I want a cheap machine reprint from a 
35mm negative (or 120 actually) they feed it into a machine (a frontier 
usually) that scans it and then prints it. And if you look at it 
closely enough you can see the pixels (usually requires a loupe)

But on the other hand, now I can get 8x10s printed onto fuji crystal 
archive for only $1.90  (from digital files)

Tell the members of your group that unless they are printing all of 
their images by hand in chemistry (and not using a commercial lab) they 
have no room to argue.

-mh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "sm7bxd" <sm7bxd@y...> wrote:

> Hi - You got it right,
> 
> There is nothing wrong with photojournalism - it's a job for a 
> photographer needing an zoom to get that very picture without
> changing lens at all, many with 800 ASA films - I have done it myself.
> 
> That's why I said - what I said - Zooms and photojournalism hangs 
> toghther not! Often handheld, often in a hurry, to catch up all those
> assignments to make his/hers living. Good pictures had been taken - 
> but how many lost - when the winder rips the film through the 
> camerahouse!
> 
> Zoom is a splended tool for a splendid photournalist - not right??
> Zoom is also not a splended tool for 100 ASA trying to do fineart.
> Zooms are bad because - try to buy one for a deasent price for an 
> Hasselblade - did you see one of those?
> 
> Did You ever see a zoom an a LF-camera? 
> 
> And those cameras *could* certainly stand a zoom better than 35 mm 
> camera.....or are they that good now...that I shall window out 
> everything over 35 mm???
> 
> I own zooms as well - but that is for vaccation when traveling light 
> with my 35 mm camera. But is that little filmpiece on a 35 mm camera 
> best toghether with a zoom?
> 
> Ah - you know what I mean - and all of this is out of topics for this
> forum - not? And out of topics of my main question:
> _____________________________________________________
> 
> My question was about "Is quad, PIEZO and color pigment to be 
> regarded as "experimental" photo?
> ___________________________________________________
> (For those who forgot this was the real topic of this inlay!)
> 
> And You starts arguing about the situation where I mensioned the Word 
> zoom in a sence - that was the beginners at my photoclub was using 
> zooms and only have one camerahouse not able to switch film - that 
> might be more important in certain situations!
> That was a picture of how it looked at my photoclub - where I'm 
> regarded as a stranger since the computer does the picture 
> automaticly for me - just like the autofocus of those Nikon 
> Zoomlenses - it was playing with words - to give you a certain 
> feeling.
> 
> But one good fellow did understand what i meant - and that good 
> answer came from Áustralia. 
> 
> Read that one!
> 
> The others here either don't care or don't want to hold that hot 
> potatoe!
> I have a feeling that most hang their quads/Piezo next to the 
> siverphotos - not saying a word!
> 
> This was also written with some satir - but who cares?
> In what legue do Quad/Pizo play - none cares!
> Strange indeed! Remarkable!
> 
> 
> Fiat Lux!
> 
> Bo Wrangborg
> Sweden
> Moderator "Minolta Multi Pro" at Yahoo

OK -
They are doing all prints themselves B/W as well as color
in and oldfasiond wet darkroom. I now and then use my darkroom,
as well going wet all the way.
I agree to some sence - That if I do better there I value that print
higher - but I'm here as the members of the club - If using that
"picture" I know I'm not "cheating". 

But to get it short - The_picture_shall_stand_for_itself - it's 
qualities lies above that of the way that it was done. The technichs
used shall allways subordinate the *Picture* - whatever method used
If it so whas "Artificial Intelligence" that made the *Picture*!

It's purpose is only to appel to or give *some* spectator *feelings*! 

That's my own defination - It might so be, a picture that for has
*to much suger in the coffee* or is not understandable of me - but 
gives me a *feeling*. (Even if a zoom was used /smile/) even if it's 
blurru but gives some spectators that *feeling* 
So it is in most other artforms!

So I'll start that civil war - until I'm throuwn out of that 
Photoclubs of mine! I have temper, good and bad, so, as I said - they 
must react in some way!

But is this the way to go - war instead of love - but that would mean 
me standing there in the wet darkroom souping chemicals the old 
fasion way....or to refrase it "fight for ones rights" - that sound 
better but is the same - not? Oh - I'm 55++ years old - schould not 
evulution stop there??/smile/ 
I'm still fighting for progrees like 1968, for freedom of art.
Schould that war not ended "from the beginning" - it's just a
*Picture* nothing less nothing more! And I'll put my pictures in that 
corner of "experimental" photo - I'll try to fill the walls all over 
the photoclubs of mine - I now have a hole summer to prepare 
my "collection" for that!
 
"Computer selfmade photos"!!!!??? For them that is!
  

Bo Wrangborg
Sweden




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "husseyhussey" <mh@t...> 
wrote:
> After spending thousands on digital equipment (piezo, printers, 
> profiling equip., drum scanner etc..) I have no money left for 
zooms. 
> But I wish I did; they will be my next purchase. I've taken quite a 
few 
> weddings recently and have decided that changing lenses too fast is 
> putting too much wear on my cameras (not to mention having to lug 
> around many pounds for a everything)  For 35mm zooms are great, but 
for 
> anything larger (like the Hassys) you end up with a lens that is 
twice 
> as big, heavy, and expensive. Arguing about that is like arguing 
about 
> film speed everyone should use; you use what you need to for your 
> situation.
> 
> As far as the whole "experimental" vs standard in contests and 
salons, 
> That surprises me, since all the labs here now print everything 
(done 
> by machine that is) digitally. If I want a cheap machine reprint 
from a 
> 35mm negative (or 120 actually) they feed it into a machine (a 
frontier 
> usually) that scans it and then prints it. And if you look at it 
> closely enough you can see the pixels (usually requires a loupe)
> 
> But on the other hand, now I can get 8x10s printed onto fuji 
crystal 
> archive for only $1.90  (from digital files)
> 
> Tell the members of your group that unless they are printing all of 
> their images by hand in chemistry (and not using a commercial lab) 
they 
> have no room to argue.
> 
> -mh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "sm7bxd" <sm7bxd@y...> 
wrote:
> > Hi - You got it right,
> > 
> > There is nothing wrong with photojournalism - it's a job for a 
> > photographer needing an zoom to get that very picture without
> > changing lens at all, many with 800 ASA films - I have done it 
myself.
> > 
> > That's why I said - what I said - Zooms and photojournalism hangs 
> > toghther not! Often handheld, often in a hurry, to catch up all 
those
> > assignments to make his/hers living. Good pictures had been 
taken - 
> > but how many lost - when the winder rips the film through the 
> > camerahouse!
> > 
> > Zoom is a splended tool for a splendid photournalist - not right??
> > Zoom is also not a splended tool for 100 ASA trying to do fineart.
> > Zooms are bad because - try to buy one for a deasent price for an 
> > Hasselblade - did you see one of those?
> > 
> > Did You ever see a zoom an a LF-camera? 
> > 
> > And those cameras *could* certainly stand a zoom better than 35 
mm 
> > camera.....or are they that good now...that I shall window out 
> > everything over 35 mm???
> > 
> > I own zooms as well - but that is for vaccation when traveling 
light 
> > with my 35 mm camera. But is that little filmpiece on a 35 mm 
camera 
> > best toghether with a zoom?
> > 
> > Ah - you know what I mean - and all of this is out of topics for 
this
> > forum - not? And out of topics of my main question:
> > _____________________________________________________
> > 
> > My question was about "Is quad, PIEZO and color pigment to be 
> > regarded as "experimental" photo?
> > ___________________________________________________
> > (For those who forgot this was the real topic of this inlay!)
> > 
> > And You starts arguing about the situation where I mensioned the 
Word 
> > zoom in a sence - that was the beginners at my photoclub was 
using 
> > zooms and only have one camerahouse not able to switch film - 
that 

> > might be more important in certain situations!
> > That was a picture of how it looked at my photoclub - where I'm 
> > regarded as a stranger since the computer does the picture 
> > automaticly for me - just like the autofocus of those Nikon 
> > Zoomlenses - it was playing with words - to give you a certain 
> > feeling.
> > 
> > But one good fellow did understand what i meant - and that good 
> > answer came from Áustralia. 
> > 
> > Read that one!
> > 
> > The others here either don't care or don't want to hold that hot 
> > potatoe!
> > I have a feeling that most hang their quads/Piezo next to the 
> > siverphotos - not saying a word!
> > 
> > This was also written with some satir - but who cares?
> > In what legue do Quad/Pizo play - none cares!
> > Strange indeed! Remarkable!
> > 
> > 
> > Fiat Lux!
> > 
> > Bo Wrangborg
> > Sweden
> > Moderator "Minolta Multi Pro" at Yahoo

husseyhussey wrote:

>For 35mm zooms are great, but for 
>anything larger (like the Hassys) you end up with a lens that is twice 
>as big, heavy, and expensive. Arguing about that is like arguing about 
>film speed everyone should use; you use what you need to for your 
>situation.
>
Very true.. I'm not even sure there is enough variety in flat F zooms in 
larger format glass anyway..


[Keith]
 
 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >For 35mm zooms are great, but for
> >anything larger (like the Hassys) you end up with a lens that is twice
> >as big, heavy, and expensive. Arguing about that is like arguing about
> >film speed everyone should use; you use what you need to for your
> >situation.
> >
> Very true.. I'm not even sure there is enough variety in flat F zooms in
> larger format glass anyway..

I thinking of getting a zoom for my 11x14. That way I wouldn't have to crop.
Would you recommend the Sigma or Soligor?

Hi,

/smile/ 
You guys pulling my legs? - You managed!

Totaly out of topics!

But OK - I like a joke - but wasn't it about experimental pho.....

Now we are soon into experimwntal zooms for 11x14" - very 
interesting - indeed!

/quad-smile/

Fiat Lux!   ("Let There be Light!")

Regards
Bo Wrangborg
Moderator Minolta "multipro" at Yahoo
Sweden

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Moreno Polloni" <mp@d...> 
wrote:
> > >For 35mm zooms are great, but for
> > >anything larger (like the Hassys) you end up with a lens that is 
twice
> > >as big, heavy, and expensive. Arguing about that is like arguing 
about
> > >film speed everyone should use; you use what you need to for your
> > >situation.
> > >
> > Very true.. I'm not even sure there is enough variety in flat F 
zooms in
> > larger format glass anyway..
> 
> I thinking of getting a zoom for my 11x14. That way I wouldn't have 
to crop.
> Would you recommend the Sigma or Soligor?

My experience with camera clubs over the past 25 years has 
been overwhelmingly negative. Groucho Marx's quip about never 
wanting to join any club that would have him as a member sort of 
applies to me, even though people have repeatedly asked me to 
- they obviously didn't know me as well as they thought they did.

The problems were numerous, and I saw them coming a mile 
away: I loved 35mm, while many club members wouldn't give the 
time of day to anyone shooting smaller than medium format; 
when my landscape work was leaning toward a somewhat 
quirky sort of impressionism, it would be judges as being too 
fussily artsy(!); I would be on of the very few to show up with work 
done with lenses wider than 28mm - let's just say the judging 
and coversation regarding this one fact was interesting.  An old 
friend here in New York is a member of one of the better-known 
camera clubs here, and her experience, if anything, has actually 
been a bit worse, with crazy-harsh critiques of work of hers that I 
thought was stunning. Of course, I had warned her of this 
happening prior to her joining.

Photographers, of course, can be a highly opinionated lot (bless 
'em!), but it's also all too true that we can be an awfully
provincial 
lot as well, and nowhere is this more apparent than in the 
hothouse environment of the camera club (with the possible 
exception of the New York gallery scene).  One-upmanship plays 
hand-in-glove with this too: At the camera store, the proud owner 
of a fixed-zoom-lens digital SLR crows about how his camera 
will wipe the floor with the film-burning 35mm rangefinder slung 
over my shoulder;  someone else who just bought a MF 
rangefinder, interestingly, tells me almost exactly the same thing 
(but in the latter case is briefer, and can actually explain *why* he 
feels that way).  I simply smile wanly and ask the counter person 
for a few bricks of film and some Lyson carts.

This may be one of the most flat-out exciting periods in 
photography - on the one hand, so much in the way of 
technology-driven methods are really giving us interesting 
solutions to longstanding photographc issues (as well as 
offering, IMO, solutions in search of problems, unfortunately); On 
the proverbial other hand, we see renewed interest in *very* old 
processes, in some cases spurred on by - ironically - digital 
scanning and printing.  This, I feel, is a Very Good Thing, and 
something that would be somewhat lost in the padded...ahem, 
carpeted rooms where club members congregate every second 
Tuesday (or something).  I won't shoot on anything but film for 
the time being, but after the film is souped n' louped, it's off to
the 
scanner and printers as fast as I can go.  There's room for all of 
this, and all of us.  Process IS important, and yet we have to 
develop those processes/workflows that work for each of us, to 
get the work right for us before we get around to showing it to 
others - the moment when the work stands or falls on its own 
merit (hopefully).

And, to Bo: at least here in the States there's a time-honored 
childhood tradition regarding clubs and "clubbiness" - if they 
won't have you, go out and start your own. ;-)

 - Barrett

Thanks Barrett,

Where I live - the photoclub of this area killed itself...by
internal struggle for power and ..You all know that stuff ..not at 
all unusual ..and that was 13 years ago. 
As a matter of fact - everyone still remember that!
Perhaps it was good?????

No one never dared to pick up that hat again!!!

That said ...being 55+ years old ... I strongly feel there is a 
vacuum here. This town is full of theaters , artgalleries , 
jazzclubbs.....

You are right .... I'll try to pick up that hat again!

Not an easy one - this was the former town for making film(movies) in 
Sweden...so I have a feeling no one dares to.....

Remarkable - this town without an progressiv *picture* society.

It's so burdened by it's former history - that no one dares!
We have a huge film museum!!!!!

OK - before You gave me that suggestion I had it in mind - and I'm 
grown now....to "pick that hat up"....but thinking more in *pictures* 
than *photos* I'll try to put some fire on this - but doing it myself 
chosing my fellow photographrs - I'll try to do this photoclub a more 
progressive touch - a "jazzier" approach not burdened by it's 
history - giving it a place in the time being and coming - platinum 
to digital "all of the jazz bands allowed". A word used could be the 
dream name "The free liberal photoclub of Kristianstad -Sweden" ! 
Come as you are - do what you feel for - no competitions - because 
one can't compete in art- but exhibitions etc.

"I have a dream" - I'll try to fullfill it - without old judges - the 
spectators shall be our judges - not "old frozen fast people" that 
think they know!

Opening of an exhibitions - and do the show stright out!
Perhaps even putting pricetags on the *pictures* - not 
necessery "marketprices" - but a price - and then the real judges - 
the spectatars might understand - and gives hints to some of us - 
what is correct - at that very time!

Thanks to You from Australia - sorry don't remember Your name just 
now, and to You Darren.

The others might open a new thread discussing zooms for LF-cameras,
as you did find that more interesting in this thread - go on!

I have a mission now - and I do have friends to start talking to!

Who knows - old Kristianstad/Sweden - will be placed again on the map 
of Film and Photo!

And by that - I feel forced to end this thread as it got some 
qualities and inspirations here at the end of it! Don't destry this 
end/start!

Fiat Lux! ( Let There be Light!)

Regards

Bo Wrangborg
Sweden
Moderator of Minolta "multipro" at Yahoo 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "amateriat" <bwbenton@b...> 
wrote:
> My experience with camera clubs over the past 25 years has 
> been overwhelmingly negative. Groucho Marx's quip about never 
> wanting to join any club that would have him as a member sort of 
> applies to me, even though people have repeatedly asked me to 
> - they obviously didn't know me as well as they thought they did.
> 
> The problems were numerous, and I saw them coming a mile 
> away: I loved 35mm, while many club members wouldn't give the 
> time of day to anyone shooting smaller than medium format; 
> when my landscape work was leaning toward a somewhat 
> quirky sort of impressionism, it would be judges as being too 
> fussily artsy(!); I would be on of the very few to show up with 
work 
> done with lenses wider than 28mm - let's just say the judging 
> and coversation regarding this one fact was interesting.  An old 
> friend here in New York is a member of one of the better-known 
> camera clubs here, and her experience, if anything, has actually 
> been a bit worse, with crazy-harsh critiques of work of hers that I 
> thought was stunning. Of course, I had warned her of this 
> happening prior to her joining.
> 
> Photographers, of course, can be a highly opinionated lot (bless 
> 'em!), but it's also all too true that we can be an awfully
> provincial 
> lot as well, and nowhere is this more apparent than in the 
> hothouse environment of the camera club (with the possible 
> exception of the New York gallery scene).  One-upmanship plays 
> hand-in-glove with this too: At the camera store, the proud owner 
> of a fixed-zoom-lens digital SLR crows about how his camera 
> will wipe the floor with the film-burning 35mm rangefinder slung 
> over my shoulder;  someone else who just bought a MF 
> rangefinder, interestingly, tells me almost exactly the same thing 
> (but in the latter case is briefer, and can actually explain *why* 
he 

> feels that way).  I simply smile wanly and ask the counter person 
> for a few bricks of film and some Lyson carts.
> 
> This may be one of the most flat-out exciting periods in 
> photography - on the one hand, so much in the way of 
> technology-driven methods are really giving us interesting 
> solutions to longstanding photographc issues (as well as 
> offering, IMO, solutions in search of problems, unfortunately); On 
> the proverbial other hand, we see renewed interest in *very* old 
> processes, in some cases spurred on by - ironically - digital 
> scanning and printing.  This, I feel, is a Very Good Thing, and 
> something that would be somewhat lost in the padded...ahem, 
> carpeted rooms where club members congregate every second 
> Tuesday (or something).  I won't shoot on anything but film for 
> the time being, but after the film is souped n' louped, it's off to
> the 
> scanner and printers as fast as I can go.  There's room for all of 
> this, and all of us.  Process IS important, and yet we have to 
> develop those processes/workflows that work for each of us, to 
> get the work right for us before we get around to showing it to 
> others - the moment when the work stands or falls on its own 
> merit (hopefully).
> 
> And, to Bo: at least here in the States there's a time-honored 
> childhood tradition regarding clubs and "clubbiness" - if they 
> won't have you, go out and start your own. ;-)
> 
>  - Barrett