Should there be a Wet Plate subforum?

[Ari]

I'm confused by this. The question is whether or not we should be creating a distinct area to focus on the wet plate collodion process. I see no point in drawing a line to create a distinction between Emulsion Process and Darkroom Process. The wet plate process can be (and often is) both things. Even if the way forward is to create a more inclusive "All Things Alt" sub-forum, I still see little value in drawing lines between camera process and subsequent darkroom process, because - for example - if you make wet plate negatives with the intention of making prints from them, there is value in being able to find data in the same place. After all, POP print making is "creating photographs made using emulsions applied by the photographer", which is intimately related to making the collodion negative.

Paul "offering data" Barden

And there's overlap in the chemicals, too. The same WP processes are used for negatives and positives, much of the chemistry is the same (with some tweaking perhaps), so making a distinction between emulsion and darkroom is quite unnecessary.

[paulbarden]

And there's overlap in the chemicals, too. The same WP processes are used for negatives and positives, much of the chemistry is the same (with some tweaking perhaps), so making a distinction between emulsion and darkroom is quite unnecessary.

Yup.

[Steve Goldstein]

One of the great problems with the Internet is the diffuse and repetitive nature of information. There seem to multiple Facebook groups on almost any topic you can imagine, photo-related or not. I imagine that a wet-plate or alt-process or whatever subforum here would have a much higher signal-to-noise ratio than something on FB, but is it appropriate or productive to duplicate a resource that already exists - on Photrio (see picture)?

I don't have any skin in this game, nor do I expect to in this lifetime, I just think this should be part of the discussion.

Mods, feel free to delete if you think this post is not a positive contribution to the topic.

[rdenney]

Okay, I think I agree to not restricting it to image-capture.

Here's the risk of broadening it to all alt-processes: This is a large-format photography forum, not generally a chemical process forum. Of course, chemical process is fundamentally linked to large format, in the absence of workable digital capture methods, so much discussion of chemical processes is absolutely on point with the large format topic.


So, we will always draw the line when the topic bleeds so far away from the large-format focus that it loses touch with the purpose of this forum. There's not much risk of that happening when discussing wet-plate, of course. But we have to make sure we keep that focus, and that focus isn't as automatic for many alternative processes. Which leads me to think that it should be "large-format wet plate, and nothing but". Of course, wet plate images smaller than 4x5, like all smaller format images, have a place where they can be displayed, and certainly some discussion would be agnostic to format, just as it is in some of our other sub-forums.

But we would expect a wet plate sub-forum here to be about wet plate for large format photographers, whereas Photrio would not apply that constraint.

Rick "just thinking out loud to elicit comments for consideration by the mods" Denney

[Ari]

But we would expect a wet plate sub-forum here to be about wet plate for large format photographers, whereas Photrio would not apply that constraint.

I think that's a reasonable expectation and it should be fairly easy (i.e. very little moderation) to keep within the bounds of that definition.

[Tin Can]

I don't want to go to APUG

I have my reasons

However sometimes I chase a topic to there

OK, no Tiny Plate, they will be orphaned...

Yet I love my Carte de visite collection and will emulate in my cave

I still disagree with exclusion of plate/sheet holders of small stature to ghetto

They still, are are not ROLL FILM, yet even roll film was once LF

Peace

[Corran]

One thing about this forum, is that we simply have the "LF Forums" that encompass everything from "Announcements" to "Style and Technique," along with the Community area and then on top the "Site Forums" which is more like general/feedback.

It seems to me that many forums have more granulation - say, a "Cameras and Lenses" section that would include:

Camera and Camera Accessories
Cameras (ULF)
Lens and Lens Accessories
etc.

Next would be "Darkroom" perhaps, including all the darkroom / film processing / printing subfora. Maybe a hybrid or digital section, etc. etc., with finally coming to the point of this thread, an "Antique Processes" or whatever would be an appropriate heading, and then under that, the "Wet-plate" subforum, along with other kinds of forums to discuss albumen, salt printing, carbon, whatever. Perhaps some of these can be grouped in some way, not sure how to call it.

Just a thought. I don't really have much to contribute on this front, but I would certainly be interested in reading.

By the way, in reference to the forum that is being shut down, another possible "subforum" could be a copy of that forum in read-only. Perhaps difficult to do.

[Tin Can]

Just bought the Quinn book as described in this thread.

https://www.largeformatphotography.i...=1#post1552569

I will have half and half to practice pouring by noon.

Onward

[paulbarden]

Just bought the Quinn book as described in this thread.

https://www.largeformatphotography.i...=1#post1552569

I will have half and half to practice pouring by noon.

Onward

I hope you bought the 2019 edition? It’s a much expanded version with vastly more information.

[Two23]

As it turns out, pouring collodion is pretty easy. It's more viscous than your half & half. The single hardest part is learning the relationship between developing time and exposure.


Kent in SD