Never been in a darkroom [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

Donald Qualls

29-May-2006, 12:25

Am I the only LF photographer that has never been in a darkroom?

Yep. You must have missed the orientation.

I'd rather spend time in the darkroom than in front of my computer any day. Sadly, my darkroom is also the master bathroom in the house, and my wife keeps wanting to use it for its original function (she says the small one is hard to get up from; maybe I need to install a grab bar for her).

paulr

29-May-2006, 12:30

years ago darkroom processes were the only choices. today they exist side by side with a lot of others. it's really up to you if you want to learn to make traditional prints.

while it's easy to say you're "missing out on something" by not doing it, the truth is we're always missing out on most things. i made a lot of silver prints in the darkroom over the years, but technially i was missing out on the joys of making daguerrotypes and salt prints and carbon prints ... and paintings and scuptures and lithographs and suspension bridges ....

you choose your tools and processes from among many. in doing so you decide what it's ok to miss out on. the important thing is to try to make a good choice. if you're not sure if you'd like darkroom work, maybe you have a friend who does it ... you could hang out in the dark and help out and see if you like it.

Wayne

29-May-2006, 13:28

Yes, you are the only one and yes, you are missing out on a lot. About 170 years worth. Try it and see for yourself.

Wayne

Joseph O'Neil

29-May-2006, 14:06

I think it boils down to colour VS black and white. If you are doing colour, with good colour chemistry harder and harder to find (Cibachrome, dye transfer - what else I am missing), probally computer is the way to go.

But with Black & White, so are so many variables, so many parametsd, so many chances to see things differently, I think the "wet" darkroom offers plenty of choices.

While I have seen some amazing B&W work digita, I l think there are prints you can make in the "traditonal" (or alternative processes) that cannot compete with digital. Like trying to reproduce an oil painting digitally - you are missing the point.

As for computers themselves - too noisy for me to relax. For me computers are for work, not creativity. Your milage may and will vary. My darkroom, small as it is , is a sanctuary away from the world, quiet, dark, peaceful. I don't feel creative in front of a computer.

bottom line - working in the darkroom is like - well what Louis Armstrong said about Jazz - “If you have to ask what jazz is, you'll never know.” I listen to Jazz while printing. :)

joe

reellis67

29-May-2006, 14:58

I have to say that I higly recommend visiting a darkroom at least once, just to get the feel for the process. For me, there is really nothing like working in the darkroom. The ability to work the entire process with my hands means everything to me. Call me a luddite if you wish, but there is nothing more rewarding to me than creating things by hand, be it in the woodshop or the darkroom.

- Randy

Wayne

29-May-2006, 15:20

Call me a luddite if you wish,
- Randy

Luddite. ;)

Wayne

Patrik Roseen

29-May-2006, 15:21

Hi Norm, I guess you are not alone in not having been in a darkroom, but just like Donald Qualls was saying I use my bathroom for enlarging black&White prints. I have only been doing this for a few months now and it feels like magic every time the paper is developed and the print appears...and when I do dodge and burn with my bare hands sweeping through the light rays from the enlarger...oh, I have fallen in love with it. You really have to try it. I started from scratch without any assistance from anyone doing contact prints. I was fortunate to use a very good multigrade paper (Fotokemika Fineprint) so the first prints encouraged me to continue. But I too would recommend you join someone in a darkroom to get a feel for it. It truly is magical. Kind regards, Patrik

reellis67

29-May-2006, 15:21

Doh!

reellis67

29-May-2006, 15:23

I'll jump again here just to say that I too use my master bath as a darkroom. It does take a little time to set up and take down, but not much more than 10-15 minutes for each.

- Randy

Norm Buchanan

29-May-2006, 15:52

It does indeed sound like something worth doing. I am a bit apprehensive as the course I did most poorly on in university was chemistry. My wife is not fond of chemicals so I think that the bathroom is out. I'll try to find someone who has a darkroom I could "experience".

I must say that I love the digital workflow and that I find no limitations with this approach (not that I have anything to compare to), as long as I am working with film larger than 35mm. Photoshop is brilliant and I can't imagine I'll be able to have the same control with things like dodging and burning in a darkroom, but who knows...

At the very least it would be nice to be able to develop my own film.

reellis67

29-May-2006, 16:07

I don't want to start another film/digital thing here, but I would just like to say that all of those Photoshop tools are based on things that were done in the wet darkroom.

Certainly do your own film at least once. There is little or no chemistry knowledge needed unless you want to need it. Everything is available pre-mixed and ready to roll, or agitate as it were. All you need to do film is a changing bag and a tank/reel combo. There are a couple of PDFs out there on how to do it for the first time and I assure you, it is much easier done than said. Have fun!

- Randy

Janko Belaj

29-May-2006, 16:41

I don't think that you are the only one without darkroom experience, and I don't think that you are missing something -- if you are satisfied with your prints. I have been in darkroom from my 12th year till my 30... and than a gap of almost 8-9 years. Last few years I'm back in processing my b&w negs, but still scanning them. I am building new darkroom right now (long process) and can hardly wait to put my fingers in chemistry, but I don't think that I will ever (but never say never!) work alone with color processes... that decision is up to each of one of us. I believe.

Scott Knowles

29-May-2006, 16:41

Ralph Barker

29-May-2006, 17:15

Norm - as others have said, darkroom work isn't everyone's cup of tea. But, like strange foods from exotic, far-off lands, it might be good to experience it - at least once, to see how it "tastes" to you.

For some us, though, darkroom is to photography what the orgasm is to sex. The darkroom is where the "magic" happens, even if getting to the point of exposing the film is a real joy. Certainly, there are other methods to arrive at an equivalent result - a print you like, even if you didn't do it yourself.

My suggestion would be to give it a try. A day in the darkroom with some guidance might open up a whole new realm for you. Or not. But unless you try it, you'll never know.

Bruce Watson

29-May-2006, 17:58

Norm,

I've done both. Unlike most everyone else, I don't think you are missing a thing.

What the darkroom has to offer that digital doesn't includes smells, messes, running water, whacking things in the dark, dropping things in the dark, backaches, sore feet, contact dermatitis, and hundreds of variables and variable interactions, like highlight dry-down.

People spend endless hours trying to tame the darkroom beasts. The beasts don't want to be tamed. The result is that darkroom prints are all a little different, even at the hands of an expert printer. Many people think this is good and will recite the "hand made" mantra. I think it's just a sign of a process that's out of control.

Very little of what you learn in the darkroom translates to processing digitally. I've still got a box full of funny looking dodge tools that make me laugh every time I see them. It's just hard to believe that I used to work in such crude conditions.

All that said, a good darkroom print, especially a silver gelatin print, has a beauty all its own. I'm not putting them down. I own a few and have them hanging on my walls. I also own a few inkjet prints and have them hanging on my walls too. And some oil paintings...

It is perhaps easier for me to say this than you, since I've been there and done that. But I got to tell ya, digital printing is great and I'm not looking back.

Norm Buchanan

29-May-2006, 21:04

Thanks for your perspective Bruce, and others. I am very happy with my prints, so darkroom experience would be more for "education" I guess. I am curious, but I photograph 70-80% of the time using Velvia and after researching E6 processing this evening I am not so sure it would be very practical. I still may attempt B&W processing as it sounds more straightforward, not to mention I need to send my 4x5 B&W negs out of state to get them processed.

Capocheny

30-May-2006, 02:42

Norm,

I'm going to be the devil's advocate here and state categorically that you ARE missing something! :)

I use to work in a darkroom for a newspaper and loved every minute of it. The very first time I was exposed to a darkroom... I saw my first image pop up magically in front of my very eyes. And, I say that with all reverence! There IS a lot of history in the process and it's well worth experiencing if even for a brief time. Personally, I am very thankful to have been taught how to do proper darkroom work.

Nowadays, I don't do any of my work in a darkroom. Like some of the other folks here... I do it via a scanner and computer. Yes, many (most?) of the stuff that you use to do in the darkroom can be done on computer too. But, you miss out on the anticipation of the image popping up in front of your eyes! :)

The other thing you'll miss (albeit, debatable! :)) is the smell of fixer in the morning!

If I were in your shoes... I'd go and find a darkroom rental facility. Spend a bit of time in there with someone who knows what they're doing. Experience it for yourself and if you don't enjoy the process... what have you lost other than a few hours of your time? :>)

And, if you find yourself enjoying the process... that's a little gift you've given yourself! :)

Anyway... give it a try!

Cheers

Juergen Sattler

30-May-2006, 06:01

For some us, though, darkroom is to photography what the orgasm is to sex. The darkroom is where the "magic" happens, even if getting to the point of exposing the film is a real joy. Certainly, there are other methods to arrive at an equivalent result - a print you like, even if you didn't do it yourself.

LOL

Bill_1856

30-May-2006, 06:04

Congratulations! Wish I could say the same.

Mike Davis

30-May-2006, 06:48

Interesting comments. I haven't touched a darkroom in 25+ years. I wasn't good at it then and subsequently learned to let labs do that part. And even though I'm just starting in 4x5 (when Layton gets his cameras made), I'm still going to let a local lab process the film to start, but I may eventually develop the B&W film at home. I'm focusing on the computer side for scanning and printing. In the end I like being in the field getting the photograph far more than processinging and printing film.

Well, there are some good labs out there. But, who can develop your negatives better than you? You saw the image, took the shot, hopefully wrote down your notes, and you know your camera's quirks.

Since I have processed my own film, I seldom (if ever) have scratches. I don't do color at the house, but I don't trust anyone else to develop my B&W. It's just too easy to do myself to worry about losing something because someone else had a bad day.

Before I built my current darkroom, I processed film in daylight tanks in the kitchen (being sure to clean thorooughly before and after). I then printed in a community darkroom or if I was taking a class the University. About 2 years ago, I built a small darkroom at the house. At 5x7, it won't win any efficiency awards, but it has enough room for 2 enlargers, tray stacks to do 11x14 two part fix and an 11x14 washer. It also has space for my chemicals (bulk and premixed).

In the past year, I've looked at simplifying. I'm making more contact prints. I'm mixing my own chemicals from scratch (which takes VERY little time and assures me of fresh chemistry).

Though I've worked with computers for over 20 years,been involved in the infancy of electronic retouching and taught photoshop to Art Directors, I much prefer my tiny darkroom to the computer.

Mike Davis

Slade Zumhofe

30-May-2006, 09:34

This is a question and buddy and I have just asked ourselves. There will be a point--very soon that more and more people coming into LF will not have used a darkroom.

I happen to be someone that just came from a darkroom and now only use it to development my negs--the rest is done at a computer. Don't get me wrong--I LOVED the darkroom but felt this was a better fit. I am now more productive, shoot more, spend more time with the wife and kids, and can do a better job on my images since "time" isn't the deciding factor on what you can achieve. That being said when you step away from the standard BW silver and talk about other processes--I think digital has a very hard time replicating the "look" (plat/palad.--to mention a few).

I personally don't think it will be worth it to even rent a darkroom space. You either need to get into it or stick with what you have. It takes a lot of time to get good in the wetlab and you will only frustrate yourself. I peronally am glad I began in the wetlab--I don't think I could be very good at what I do on the computer if I had not first perfected my technique in the darkroom. I'm not saying it can't be done but it does seem it would be much more difficult without that experience.

I will tell you the one thing I don't miss about the wetlab--going back in and having to make another print of an old negative!! I got so far behind on new work because I kept running out of my older stuff--just wasn't as exciting the 3rd and 4th time around. Now, I get the excitement the first time and it is done--print any size at any time I want and can then move on to the next new image. That is my favorite part--other than getting to step away in the middle of working an image to play with the kids.

Good luck.

CXC

30-May-2006, 11:27

"who can develop your negatives better than you" -- how about a lab pro who does it 8 hours a day 5 days a week, and whose livelihood depends on it? That guy not only develops my film better, he also makes better prints than I can.

I worked in two college newspaper darkrooms, and I had a darkroom in my house back when I was still shooting 35mm. Now that I can afford it, I take everything to the lab. I don't miss having a darkroom one second. I'm very happy shooting in the field, and paying somebody else to deal with the chemicals or computers, and dust and smells, etc, etc.

Remember if you want to develop your own film, you can do that in broad daylight with a changing bag and a developing tank. Mixing the chemicals is more like cooking than chemistry; the only hard part is getting the water temperature right, and even that is not always as important as some claim.

Norm Buchanan

30-May-2006, 12:07

Remember if you want to develop your own film, you can do that in broad daylight with a changing bag and a developing tank. Mixing the chemicals is more like cooking than chemistry; the only hard part is getting the water temperature right, and even that is not always as important as some claim

I really like the idea of the changing bag for my own developing but what I have read about E6 processing leads me to believe that developing my transparencies would be tricky at best. Am I wrong in assuming this?

CXC

30-May-2006, 12:27

Norm, you are right, I was only thinking of my own case, which is B&W prints. Few folks develop their own transparencies. Many mail them to the more prominent labs.

Those in this group who develop their own chrome, why?

Joseph O'Neil

30-May-2006, 13:00

"who can develop your negatives better than you" -- how about a lab pro who does it 8 hours a day 5 days a week, and whose livelihood depends on it? That guy not only develops my film better, he also makes better prints than I can.

If and when you find such a lab, I think you are very, very, very lucky. For colour, I would and still do send out. But for B&W, even when we had a custom B&W lab locally - it wasn't great. Maybe I am just in a bad location, but there didn't seem to be anybody who could do a good job commercially on B&W.

Even i fyou enver own an enlarger and shot only B&W, I woudl still learn to develop yourself at home. A jobo tank and setup doesn't take a lot of doing. Plus, the creative control you have over a situation is amazing.

Always shoot two sheets whenever possible, right? At least I do (4x5 is cheap enough to do that, if I were shooting 8x10, I would likely be more economical in my outlook. :) ). Well with two sheets, you develop the first one in HC-110, the second one in D-76. Or I shoot one side with HP5, the other side with Tri-X. One i develop full time, the next I pull or push the develop.

I could go on and on, but my point is, once you send out your B&W film (any size negative) to a pro lab, you loose all that creativity. Colour chemistry - to me - total PITA. Tried it, hated it, now send it out commercially. B&W enlarger vs digital printer for prints - hey, I prefer enlarger, but whatever works best for you. But B&W film devleopment? Ah, to me, the only real way to go is do it yourself. Keep total creative control under your own hand at all times I think.

joe

Mike Davis

30-May-2006, 13:14

"who can develop your negatives better than you" -- how about a lab pro who does it 8 hours a day 5 days a week, and whose livelihood depends on it? That guy not only develops my film better, he also makes better prints than I can.

But is he going to remember that you want some expansion because it was overcast that day and you had four zones while you want 5. Is he going to do each negative of yours individually, if necessary. Will he dev by inspection? Is he worried about his kid who's sick? Does he have a hangover? Is he bored and watching the clock?

I seldom have completely straight development or printing. I also don't have a lab in town that does 8x10 B&W anymore. But even if they were here and they were as good as me, I would likely do it myself.

As I noted there are good labs out there. I use them for color work.

When it comes to my B&W, though, I will shoot it, develop it and traditionally print it. If I want to use it for other things I will also scan it and do what is necessary.

I know that I will mix the chemicals correctly, develop correctly, print correctly, calibrate correctly, scan correctly, retouch correctly and prepare for output correctly.

Bill_1856

30-May-2006, 14:07

Good for you, CXC!

Ed Richards

30-May-2006, 14:45

Developing your own negatives really makes sense for the 90% of us who would have to send negatives into the void to get them processed. A jobo expert tank does an incredible job - I have done 800 sheets in the last year with a Jobo and have no scratches. I screwed up a couple of tanks - one batch of bad developer and, early on, I forgot to put the lid on the tank before I took it out of the changing bag.:-(

It really helps to see the negatives as soon as you can after shooting, and mailing them off makes this impossible. When I first started with 4x5, I shot about 100 sheets of Polaroid. Fastest way to get up to speed and a lot cheaper than a Betterlight back.:-)

Once I process the negatives, I scan them, file them, and work digitally. The darkroom was fun, and but is really hard to get good at without spending more time than those of us with a day job can usually afford. I do not miss it.

CXC

30-May-2006, 14:58

I shoot straightforward stuff, basically urban/industrial landscapes, generally in bright sun, with high contrast. I never shoot portraits, and in general prefer my stuff to be empty of humans. I'm usually satisfied if the final print looks pretty much like what I saw on the ground glass, the whites are white, and the blacks are black. Thus, I am probably much easier to satisfy than many others.

I like my photos in tight focus, and to look like what I saw. If I exercise care in the field, and wait for good light, me and my lab can accomplish this pretty reliably. From my point of view, zone system adjustments are to correct for wrong or impossible exposure, or for subtleties in largely grey images that don't interest me.

As far as I can understand it, creativity in the darkroom means making all or part of the print look different from what was seen on the ground glass, for whatever aesthetic reasons. But I don't want to change anything, so I don't need any darkroom creativity.

So clearly my position is far from the norm, but at least I won't be getting any more itchy lumps on the back of my fingers!

Terence McDonagh

30-May-2006, 15:39

Although I develop my own stuff, I sort of agree with CXC. But I happen to shoot the same subjects and apparently look for the same things in my prints. That said, I enjoy the darkroom and am just about to set up one in my apartment. I've played with all of the pushing and pulling development, and darkroom hijinks, but find I don't need much more than some simple dodging and burning for 75% of my photos. Ignorance is bliss I guess, as I'm mostly self-taught. I'm almost afraid to take a printing workshop and find out how much better my prints could be. Luckily, I like them the way they are.

Colin Robertson

30-May-2006, 16:19

CXC! Are you being a tease? To suggest 'darkroom creativity' is redundant or frivolous is close to suggesting that all creativity is redundant. Why not just have a handy little auto-everything digi-snapper? Save even more trouble. . . .
Norman-coming to this forum and wondering if darkrooms are good is like turning up at the Vatican and asking if they think having a Pope is cool. Here's my (personal) view. Although I drive, I can't fix my car. I have neither the time nor inclination to learn the skills, so I take it to the garage. Other folks just love to get under the bonnet (sorry-Hood)- it just does nothing for me personally. You'll see that mood in these posts; Some people just want to shoot film and let a lab do the 'tech bit'- fair enough.
However- you will notice the fervour with which others promote the darkroom. Why? Because we have an emotional attachment to a process which has given us pleasure and creative satisfaction for years That's right- emotional. It isn't exactly possible always to explain why we take pleasure in the things we do, but it makes it no less important to us.
I made my first print in 1976. I still have it. Maybe it's pure Pavlovian conditioning but I LOVE clicking on the safelight and closing the door. The smell of fresh developer is just wonderful. I set up a new darkroom two years ago, and went LF in November last year. Right now I'm making the best prints of my life, and really enjoying it.
And the point is . . . Give the darkroom a try. Borrow one, try to find a mentor. . .The worst that can happen is you don't like it, but at least you get a taste for the history of photography. At best it's a wonderful creative experience. Also, the way things are going, five or ten years from now you might find it's all too late. Yes, I love film, but I can see it's in decline. If you're tempted to try, best do it now. SURRENDER to the DARK SIDE, Luke. Sorry, Norman . .

Norm Buchanan

30-May-2006, 16:46

[QUOTE=Colin Robertson]Norman-coming to this forum and wondering if darkrooms are good is like turning up at the Vatican and asking if they think having a Pope is cool. [QUOTE]

Well I had hoped I was asking something a bit more interesting than that ;) but I get your point. The responses are certainly thought prevoking and I see both sides. I was really interested in finding out if there was anyone else who had never been in a darkroom, apparently not many. I should fess up and say that when I was a grad student I once supervised some students who were making holograms as a project in a physics lab. That was a terrible experience, but mostly because the slightest vibration in the building caused the resulting "print" to be messed up, which I doubt is true with straight photography.

There is a local community college in my area that has a photography program and I think I may see if I can audit a course on developing or wet printing. It certainly won't hurt my digital chops to learn a bit about traditional methods. So I guess I will take a glimpse of the dark side...

Ironically I am dreading the future where film is difficult, if not impossible to obtain. I love digital but film has something special that I have grown to love. The first time I saw a Velvia transparency (2 or so years ago - yes I am a true rookie) I was completely blown away!

Brian Ellis

30-May-2006, 16:54

"Photoshop is brilliant and I can't imagine I'll be able to have the same control with things like dodging and burning in a darkroom, but who knows."

You won't.

I spent years and years working in a darkroom, took all of John Sexton's darkroom workshops, took Bruce Barnbaum's, read every book I could get my hands on, etc. etc. I don't regret a minute of it, it was great fun at the time and I like to think I became pretty good at it. I also think that having extensive darkroom experience was invaluable when I began with Photoshop and digital printing and continues to be valuable to this day. But if you're like me, a darkroom will seem hopelessly limiting if you're even half-way proficient with digital.

When I started learning to scan and print, inspired by seeing some of George deWolfe's digital prints some six or seven years ago, I thought I'd continue to do some darkroom printing side by side with the digital work. That thought lasted about a week. When I tried to print in the darkroom again it drove me crazy to pull a print out of the fix, see all the improvements that I knew I could make if I had been using Photoshop, and realize that I couldn't make any of them in the darkroom. This isn't intended to dump on anyone who still uses a darkroom, how anyone chooses to work is strictly their decision and certainly there have been plenty of great photographs that came out of darkrooms over the last century or so. I just don't find it to be the best way of working given the alternatives we now have available.

Ralph Barker

30-May-2006, 17:03

Norm Buchanan

30-May-2006, 17:16

Ralph Barker

30-May-2006, 18:06

HSR techniques are probably more sophisticated than what I'm describing. I'm just pointing out that "burning" in PS doesn't extract more detail from the neg as it does in traditional printing.

Bruce Watson

30-May-2006, 18:18

One minor, but potentially significant point about dodging and burning in Photoshop vs. the darkroom: dodging works nicely in PS, but burning is completely different. In PS, burning simply adds density, while in the darkroom, burning adds detail from the negative. The PS work-around is to shoot two negs (one for highlights and one for shadow detail) and them selectively merge them via layers in PS.
I've never had this problem. Then again, I drum scan everything, so the highlight detail is there. When I burn (much more a rarity than when I was darkroom printing) I get more density and the detail shows through just fine.

One of the nice things about Photoshop is that you can dodge/burn just the shadows, or just the midtones, or just the highlights. I've added just a touch more local contrast to distant rocks by burning in just the shadows - to make the cracks and the textures stand out a bit more. I could never figure out how to do that in the darkroom. Maybe a contrast mask, but I was never able to do it. Should have taken those Sexton workshops I supose ;-)

Dianne

1-Jun-2006, 02:19

I started doing darkroom time in 1969 when I was in college and bought my first 35mm camera. There is a certain satisfaction in doing the whole process yourself, from loading the film canisters to drying the print. Over the years I went from 35mm to 120 film, to large format and added E-6 process and have always had a darkroom, even when it ment taping tinfoil over an apartment window.

All these years later, my whole basement is my darkroom! Big enough to hold a party and invite all your friends ;) And I now do wet plate collodion (with home-brew chemicals), P.O.P. prints and a bunch of other stuff that isn't available commercially. The darkroom is "the inner sanctum", a place that is TOTALLY about the art of painting with light.

gbunton

1-Jun-2006, 12:54

Norm, I've been a commercial photographer for 30 yrs. and I've done every type of printing you can think of. I now do both digital and traditional depending on what is called for. I'd like to say there are things you learn in a traditional darkroom that you can't learn digitally many people here will understand that statement, but let me relate a story to give you an example. I once had access to a commercial lab the owner was a friend, and they had a nice cibachrome setup so I printed my own stuff in the evenings, the next day when I would go in all the techs were standing around looking at my prints from the night befour and bombarded me with questions about technical aspects about color shifts ect. they wanted answers but I couldn't give them any, you see because it was simply a matter of knowing what i was looking at and what i wanted changed. They say cezanne could distinguish between 41 shades of blue with his eyes he would have made a good color printer. In a darkroom you learn things a computer can't possibly teach you and the best judge of these issues are your own eyes slight variations in tone and contrast come to mind, but there are hundreds of others my computer image prints are really quite nice and I'm pleased with them, that being said INK is not SILVER and probably never will be, they are two different materials, knowing and understanding both can't hurt anything but if you intend to go into a darkroom to do it right will require a substantial investment of time. Gary

Colin Robertson

1-Jun-2006, 15:50

Maris Rusis

1-Jun-2006, 17:29

I guess this will seem out of kilter with the rest of the photographic world. I go into the darkroom to make photographs; to actually do photography.

Sure I perform the usual camera work, expose and develop film but most of the photography I have done in the last few decades consists of photographing film negatives with large pieces of paper-backed photographic emulsion. Instead of a camera this process involves an enlarger or a contact frame but it is still photography and the results are definitely photographs and not prints. Photographers sometimes forget (and the public never know) that the photograph on the gallery wall is not a photograph of what was in front of the camera but a photograph of what was in the camera.

The use of the word "print" in connection to paper backed photographs (but not film backed ones, why?) is an unfortunate misnomer that is probably too entrenched to eradicate.

It does matter because if you say "print" you eventually think "print" and sooner or later see "print". In the picture business prints have connotations of effortless mass production, indistinguishable replicas, low unit values, and sheer commonness. Real photographs are not like that at all. To get another photograph one has to photograph again not just prod the print button one more time. To borrow a musical analogy from Ansel Adams a photograph is equivalent to a live performance while a print is merely playing air-guitar to the CD.

If the aim is not just any picture fabricated by any convenient means but rather a real personally expressive photograph then the darkroom is the only practical place where this can be done. It is absolutely central to the art of photography.

Norm Buchanan

1-Jun-2006, 19:17

gbunton is right. Listen to a pro. I shoot for fun, and although I love it, I have no client, no master, no judge except myself. For years I worked with temporary darkrooms. The worst was a closet-I could only print in the middle of the night. Now I have a permamnent set-up and it's no accident that my prints are the best (I think) I've ever made. It's about time and committment. Learning printing, learning Zone, are all so much easier when you can devote time to it.
Holy God! I only just realised- a darkroom is just like a woman. Give her your attention, spend lots of time with her, and things will go well. Boy, are you in line for some fun. BUT, neglect her and things are gonna be miserable. So, Norm, get printing, but treat your baby right!

By the way (if you don't mind) what flavour of physicist are you??

Hi Colin,

I don't mind at all, I am an particle physicist. Actually, due to the fact that I have a profession that absorbs MUCH of my time, I have to choose carefully what I get myself into. Having said that, photography has become my one true love (aside from my wife of course) so I am willing to sleep less to expand on it.

I was leaning away from going into the darkroom due to time and other reasons, but after following another thread on the forum (Pricing Inkjet Prints) I realized something - there is something to be said for a one of a kind print. As someone who would like to sell prints I like the idea of being able to easily reproduce results; as someone who occasionally buys prints however, I like the idea of a one-of-a-kind print hanging on my wall. Hmmm, the plot thickens...

Norm

Ron Marshall

2-Jun-2006, 06:18

Norm, the last time I was in a DR was 25 years ago. When I began LF I didn't have sufficient space so I went the PS scanning route. I refrained from buying a printer until very recently because I was stuck on the fence. I like the look of silver prints and I'm not satisfied with the B/W output from the most recent Epsons that I've seen at Calumet.

I finally went for a factory refurbished Epson 2200 @ $445, and NK7 Piezotone inks. The look is different from silver and does not replace it for me, however I like the look even more than silver. With seven shades of neutral gray the tonality is very smooth and the detail is striking.

Now that I have discovered Piezotones I no longer miss the darkroom. PS gives me complete control over my images.

John Kasaian

2-Jun-2006, 07:15

I didn't read all the responses---there are so many of them this thread must have struck a collective nerve, as it did mine.

What you've missed is this: Seeing an image of trees or rocks or people or ? appear magically, under a safelight, on a sheet of paper sitting in a tray of chemicals you've mixed yourself.

That alone is worth it for me. Watching something spurt and grind out of a machine dosen't even come close.

If I were a chemist and knew all about silver halides and such, maybe I'd confuse this "magic" for a cold sterile laws of physics but I'm not and I don't.

If I were a control freak and wanted to manipulate an image to suit my own whimsey I'd consider the pros and cons of a digital versus a traditional darkroom and which means would best justify my ends with deadly seriousness, but that is really the farthest thing from my mind. Watching a "mirror image" of a time and location appear on an 8x10 (or 5x7 or 12x20) piece of magic paper is enough for me. :-)

Cheers!

Richard Ide

2-Jun-2006, 09:51

John

Well said.
The insights I have gained from this forum and the knowledge are difficult to describe in finite terms , but appreciated continually

Richard

CXC

2-Jun-2006, 10:03

John's right, it's magic when the image appears on the blank sheet of paper. But the thrill has worn off for some of us. And for $20 you can get a Polaroid camera and get it in the broad daylight by pressing a button...

Randy H

4-Jun-2006, 08:18

Blah, blah, blah...
My darkroom is my escape from reality. Lock the door,turn out the lights, put in the classical music, and produce something with MY hand, that I have shot, that looks the way I want it. I do own the digital, the courses I took in photojournalism was all done with digital and PS, and when I completed those courses, I still have my darkroom, the stinky chemicals, the screwed up negatives, the piss-poor prints... GAWD, I love my darkroom. As stated earlier, try it. You will either love it or hate it. But until you try, you will always wonder "what if". The digit has its place, and no doubt will take over eventually. I guess that is the reason I am now attempting old alternative processes. I like the way Barker put it. Next best thing to sex is a picture coming out of the final rinse that looks the way you want it to.