Why we are the elite

[windpointphoto]

I chuckle when i see people waiting in line at my local photo school( Tri-Community Photo Center, Covina CA), waiting for their prints for 8-10 hours after uploading, where as i can go into the darkroom, take out a sheet of paper, take out my negative, and make a perfectly acceptable print in about 20 minutes, tops.

Really? You're able to warm up the cold light, mix the chemicals, set up the trays, clean and load the negative, expose the paper (assuming you've made the print before so there's no testing), develop, fix, wash (??? or are you using RC)), and dry in 20 minutes? Tops? Uh huh.

[Kirk Gittings]

and make a perfectly acceptable print in about 20 minutes, tops.

Is it a race? I find any print that I put less than 4 hours or so on (sometimes much more), when I look at it the next day I always see what more I could have done if I had put the effort into it.

[domenico Foschi]

Is it a race? I find any print that I put less than 4 hours or so on (sometimes much more), when I look at it the next day I always see what more I could have done if I had put the effort into it.

One of the most unnerving things that I don't think I will ever get used to.
It is a necessary stage not to ever be completely happy.
It is one of the things that keeps us going and makes us understand a things or two about life in general.

[Brian Ellis]

Congratualtions on being able to make a perfectly acceptable print in 20 minutes. It takes people like John Sexton, Howard Bond, and Bruce Barnbaum many hours, sometimes days, to make a print that's acceptable to them. I fancied myself an excellent printer in my dark room days though not up to their standards and 20 minutes got me an acceptable proof, if I was lucky. You are indeed among the elite.

[David Luttmann]

Oh brother. If this was about a race, the digital gearhead would win. I can snap a photo and have it printed in less time than you can get the film into a tank for processing.

Don't make this about speed as when we're using film, we definitely would lose against digitals speed!

[paulr]

i always assumed the elite would be the ones who make the most compelling photographs, not the ones who lug around the biggest cameras. or puff out their chests the farthest.

[aduncanson]

I don't need to compare myself to the other photographers, and I don't care what they use.

I had a friend, (and a very knowledgeable birding enthusuast) tell me that I must look at the "Pale Male" web site devoted to the redtail hawk by that name that resides in New York City. She said that the site is really all about the photography and that every photographer she knew would kill for the equipment used to make the images on the site.

I was just then dreaming about a 12" TR convertible that I had seen offered on eBay. I knew that there was no explaining this to her, and weeks later, I have yet to look up the Pale Male website.

Not so much elite, just different

[dsimaging]

Elite?
Who set the standards?
Is that what counts?
I don't use LF because it's cool or sets me apart from the crowd.
Even regarding the time for getting a print, maybe you should be a bit more critical toward your results and a little less toward your peers who after all share your same passion even though they use different tools.

woah, my intent was sure not to start a firing match here! =)

in no way was i implying that just because i use a view camera that i am better than someone else, frankly i will use whatever tool i have to to get the job done.

the point i'm trying to make is that but taking things slowly, and much more carefully( well most of us seem to), we are able to create images and works of art that most people can't even describe.

so i don't think i'm superior or anything, but in most respects, people who use a view camera are those that are truly dedicated to their craft, because they don't just go "snap" and walk on, they make sure everything is perfect before they go "snap"

not to confuse anyone

dan

[dsimaging]

Really? You're able to warm up the cold light, mix the chemicals, set up the trays, clean and load the negative, expose the paper (assuming you've made the print before so there's no testing), develop, fix, wash (??? or are you using RC)), and dry in 20 minutes? Tops? Uh huh.

i am stating the time it takes to load a neg, take out the paper, expose it. and put it in the developer;


many of the b/w chemicals are already mixed. i call down before i come in to ask one of the lab techs to make sure there are fresh chemicals in the trays. they are willing to help me out =)

of course, for my fiber prints, it is much longer (2-3 hours due to 3 washes) and selenium toning

-dan

[dsimaging]

Elite?
Who set the standards?
Is that what counts?
I don't use LF because it's cool or sets me apart from the crowd.
Even regarding the time for getting a print, maybe you should be a bit more critical toward your results and a little less toward your peers who after all share your same passion even though they use different tools.

i am not critical to my peers. i do not judge, because that is not my place.

but when i see results, and they do as well, the same scene taken at the same time, side by side, same size print( 11x14 usually, sometimes 16x20), they look at my print and wonder why mine is cleaner(not trying to brag, but its hard not to after selenium toning my print)

we are all passionate about our specific craft. mine just involves BIG, weird looking cameras that are much older than I =)