Okay... I think I need to stop posting tonight. Every time I begin to think I'm being philosophical I make a complete fool of myself. Goodnight to you all and may God speed...
Okay... I think I need to stop posting tonight. Every time I begin to think I'm being philosophical I make a complete fool of myself. Goodnight to you all and may God speed...
This thread has taken off like a fire, and I haven't finished reading it yet. I'd just like to comment that Thomas's work speaks for itself, regardless of the debate about which process is better. It's all about the end result in my opinion, method doesn't really enter into it.
My drawing and painting skills bought me a used Mac with Adobe software. Later my Photoshop skills earned me most of the cash to buy the equipment for my darkroom and pay the rent for it. I spent countless hours there so far and managed to make a few good 36x50" C-prints in a drainage pipe, 20x24" FB prints in trays and develop C-41 4x5" sheets.
I am one of those -- "Its all about the journey." types -- so how I get there is as important as what is there at the end of the journey.
In other words, the process I use to make a print is as important as the print itself...from loading the film holders to framing the print. And this journey is just a side trip on the larger journey I make through life.
But I certainly do not expect others to make the same journey as I do -- and their journey is equally as important, and valid, as mine.
I think people are not responding to you because you are being annoying and seem utterly convinced that you are correct. So it's not interesting and not really a conversation.
Personally images are important to me. There are photographers far greater than myself who use digital cameras and print digitally and do an amazing job of it. I'd be happy to have one of their prints. I also see a lot of crappy silver work, and people who seem to justify their existence based on the fact that they think they are doing something "pure". Anyway, whatever works. I want some emotional response to a photograph (or film/video/music/conversation/etc). I don't really care what form it comes in. I use the LF camera because I find that the working method has helped me make better pictures and I've learned a lot through the process. I print digitally because it works for me, my living situation, the amount of time I have, my workflow, etc. If there was to be no more film tomorrow, I'd probably continue to make pictures, with a digital camera, and hopefully I could make some good ones.
Anyway, I think you are flogging a horse here that no one is interested in watching you flog.
Re: Gursky, I know nothing about chromogenic prints, but I believe you can make a Digital C print.
Personally if I were the buyer of a Gursky print (which for the record, I'm not likely to be, although I like him, I'm a little short on dough) I'd probably want the one that struck me a bit more emotionally. I'm guessing that whoever does his printing does a pretty good job, whatever the form, so probably his digital and (if there are any) darkroom prints would both be pretty darn good.
Vaughn's comment pretty much sums it up for me. I did a lot of traditional B&W developing and printing in the 80's when I had access to a darkroom, and I truly enjoyed the entire process. Today, I print digitally and I enjoy that process, as well. Is one process and result better than the other? I haven't a clue, and it doesn't really matter: I enjoy photography and the work of others regardless of how it was done.
"If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he marches to the beat of a different drummer" Henry David Thoreau
Make photographs! Have fun!
--P
Preston-Columbia CA
"If you want nice fresh oats, you have to pay a fair price. If you can be satisfied with oats that have already been through the horse; that comes a little cheaper."
Depends on your definition of "make". You can make a darkroom print of a C-41 negative originating 100% digitally, exposed on an LVT machine or some other type of film recorder. So it's "digital" and a "C-print".
Gursky ran his own colour darkroom until the mid-Eighties. Since around 1988, Grieger in Düsseldorf does all printing for him, and until 1995 or so they were all traditionally enlarged. Afterwards all his prints are exposed on a Lightjet-type machine (the real "digital C-print"). Some consist of two 60x170" sheets, but under ONE piece of acrylic glass. It has to strike you emotionally at least a bit when you see it in person.
But to be honest, a striking B&W FB print is a much more demanding task, creatively and technically.
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.
To a large extent, I don't really care how stuff is made. Unless I'm trying to imitate it. I mean, I'm interested in the process that it took to make something, but as far as passing value on how it was made vis a vis the creativity of the maker, that's not that interesting to me.
I've done a lot of woodwork, and have met a lot of people who do it professionally (furniture makers and boatbuilders). It can be financially crushing, and I'd never diminish someone's creativity because they used a power tool over a hand tool.
Bookmarks