This is not a discussion about analog vs digital but rather how we identify our images in an electronic format.
I am seeing some beautiful images here, some of which are obviously hand printed or created from alternative processes. I am also seeing lots of digital scans of negatives with manipulation in photoshop. If we in the LF group are going to display images as photographs then I would hope the electronic version of that image would be from the final product output and not an intermediate step, unless noted. I think it would help the darkroom movement if each image displayed would note the final image process being represented. I don't care if the final electronic version is captured on a phone camera as long as one is truthful about it. And if going from digital capture to analog output you can inspire a whole other movement.
It strikes me as odd when you look at a photographers body of work using different films, devlopers, and formats that they are all the same tone of warm brown. I can't get the same shade of brown on the same print made on the same day when using chemical means. There is variation in hand work which is what makes photography new and different every time. A golfer does not land his drives on the same spot every time.
Examples
Scan of 4x5 /8x10 Negative - Color and contrast enhanced in PS, cropped, corners darkened
Scan of toned/untoned silver Print - minimal adjustments
Scan of inkjet/pigment print
Scan of TinType - reversed and color adjustments to match/enhance original
Phone capture of print - minor adjustments
phone captue of silver print in wash tray - cant wait to see it dry
Digital Capture > large digital Negative > carbon print > scan.
Bookmarks