Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Great Idea - but not today

Subject: Re: [OM] Great Idea - but not today
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:13:31 -0400
Very strange.  "I don't like it because it looks too good."  :-)

Chuck Norcutt


On 5/10/2011 11:35 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> <Poking Caged Bear with Stick Alert!>
>
> No worries. This bear is pretty lethargic, I guess.
>
>
>> Now why would it matter, once you go high-end DSLR? All you need is a copy 
>> of Nik Software's Silver Effex Pro v2 and Adobe Photoshop CS5 and you have 
>> what you need to make genuinely cosmic black and white prints. Combine good 
>> technique with the software with Epson's 3880 printer and Epson Exhibition 
>> Fiber paper, and you can produce prints that are virtually (used advisedly) 
>> indistinguishable from silver gelatin. Use some of the premium velvet and 
>> watercolor matte papers, and, well, it's just pure magic. You'll even 
>> acquire groupies. Trust me on this!
>
> My darkroom is much less expensive than all which you've identified.
>
>
>
>> Those who are happiest in the wet darkroom have no need to change. I salute 
>> them and would not disparage them (except for AG, and that's just for 
>> sport<g>). But for those who like or would like to like black and white and 
>> who shoot digital exclusively, there's no need anymore to feel like you're 
>> Aunt Sally's bastard love child. You, too, can do black and white, and you 
>> can do it well. So well, in fact, that with enough practice, I suspect it 
>> would take trained and experienced eyes to tell the difference between their 
>> chemicals and your pixels. In a few more years, no one will be able to tell.
>
> I do not disagree with anything you've said here. I do black&  white
> with film and in the darkroom because I enjoy it and find greater
> satisfaction from it than doing digital photography. Besides, it
> justifies using the OM gear. But from a pure technical perspective,
> the digital method is getting close-enough that it really doesn't
> matter too much.
>
> However, I have yet to see a B&W print from an entirely digital
> process, as you have identified, that didn't have certain tell-tails.
> Primarily, the digital version is a little too perfect. It is the
> flaws of film that give it the character. You can fake some of that
> character, but we can spot the fakes a mile off unless you go to great
> lengths to disguise the chosen effects library.
>
> I'm working with computers and I'm around people all the time. The
> darkroom is a wonderful escape from the real world and my enlarger
> isn't connected to email or facebook.
>
> AG
>
> AG
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz