Jorge - indeed, you did post a photo. I did say "each of the experts", "taken this month", and list the time it took to create it, however yes, that's one example. More data please - need the other expert's photos! Perhaps the experts might indicate if they tested their meters per the other heated thread on meters and color temp, etc. It would also be interesting to see which subject each expert selected for the example.
( poking head out of bomb shelter, marveling at the rockets' red glare )
Hey Oren - pass me some of that new all TempaDev, maybe it will clean up a bad taste...
Hmm... I do have an ancient batch of Diafine still sitting in the back of the chemistry shelf in my darkroom. The ultimate anti-BTZS approach, that's for sure...
( ducking back into bomb shelter )
Judging from the article you sent to me a year or so ago it was apparent to me, and everyone who reviewed it, that you understand very little about film testing.
What was apparent is your inahability (and your firends) to understand proper testing methods. Other people who reviewed the article and are familiar with proper testing procedures had no trouble with it and these were more than 5 people, as a matter of fact 15 people asked me to send them the article. 9 liked it, 3 thought it was a good first attempt but needed some clarification and 3 did not like it and thought it was too difficult to understand.
In the end, people reading this thread can make a judgement of my level of understanding and capabilities to back my claims with results. So far what we have seen from you is only hot air and BS with no proof, why dont you post one of your prints. You want to make this personal, I will gladly put any of my pt/pd prints against any of your silver prints, hell I will even accept your pal Gittings as the judge......
The ultimate anti-BTZS approach, that's for sure...
Nothing is anti-BTZS...... :-)
Steve Simmons: "Judging from the article you sent to me a year or so ago it was apparent to me, and everyone who reviewed it, that you understand very little about film testing. The article was almost incomprehensible and the written conclusions were contradicted by the test prints you sent. This was not just my opinion but the other 5 people felt the same way about what you tried to put forth in the article."
What you say is pure nonesense. I read Jorge's submission, after the fact, and it was very comprehensible. The negative evaluation of it that that was made at the time was due in large measure to your ignorance of Jorge's BTZS testing, and to that of the reviwers to whom you sent the article. This is a fact. The article was not perfect, but then how much in View Camera is perfect?
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
The article was not perfect
I agree, Kirk Keyes gave me a very through critique and pointed the parts where I could have done better. Nevertheless some of the people who read it and did not practice the BTZS had not trouble understanding the graphs. I guess I should have put the roman numerals instead of the logarithmic values on the x axis so that Mr. Simmons could understand, but then I did not think this was necessary to do for someone who is the editor of the "journal of large format photography"......boy was I mistaken!
OTOH I fell for it and gave Mr. Simmons the oportunity to refuse it and make up an excuse. No big deal, thankfully I have other projects and other magazines to which I can send articles which will be impartially reviewed.
Perhaps at next June's View Camera Conference, a purely technical "shoot-out" would be interesting. Two negatives to be made, each from a given spot of a given subject with a "normal" focal length lens, one in mid-day sunlight, one in subdued light. BYO film and developer, all to be printed on a common, neutral paper, (Ilford MGIV?). Negatives and prints all displayed, blind judging, only the top finishers' names announced publicly, so no humiliation no matter how bad my, I mean, anyone's prints are.
Beyond the "Rocket Science vs. Instinct" or "Precision vs. Wide Tolerance Margin" issues, I'd love to see how pyro compares to Rodinal to HC-110 to whatever developer, and stand vs. normal agitation, etc. With all the disagreement and differing approaches, would the final prints vary that much?
No it won't happen, but it would be interesting and informative.
Sorry to interrupt the arguing...
I didn't know LF was a contact sport. I better get some pads.
Steve Simmons said:
"My position has been that it is not necessary to do all this testing to make wonderful photographs."
That isn't just your position, it's everybody's position. Nobody that I know of has claimed that it's necessary to do a lot of testing to make good photographs. Paul Butzi went so far as to point out that plenty of wonderful photographs have been made on roll film, i.e. without even being able to select individual exposures and individual development times. So why do you keep stating the obvious and claiming it as "my position" when nobody has taken a different position?
Then Steve Simmons said:
"Yes, you need to know how to use the camera, load the film, manage to get it processed somehow but you do not need to study metalurgy to be a metal sculpture (sic)."
Has someone said you need to study metalurgy to be a metal sculptor (I think you mean "sculptor" not "sculpture," one is a person, the other is an object, but I digress)? Of course they haven't. Nobody would take such a stupid position. As usual, you embrace the obvious as "my position" even though no one takes a different position. Apart from that, I'd suggest to you that artists in any field who wish to be able to convert their vision into works of art need to have a good working knowledge of their equipment and materials. I would also suggest to you that any photographer who knows nothing more than how to "use the camera, load the film, and manage to somehow get it processed" isn't likely to make excellent photographs except by the occasional happy accident. But that's a long way from saying a photographer must be an optical scientist or do a lot of testing to make good photographs.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
Mark Sawyer said:
"Sorry to interrupt the arguing"
Apology accepted but please don't do it again. : - )
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks