LVT questions

[Drew Wiley]

Hope I didn't offend you with that comment, Bob. I realize that customs are a bit different there, and that the typical way a Toronto team wins is by having the rink downsloped a bit in favor of your own goal, or else by some studio owner scheming how to fire all the camera flashes into the goalie's face at the same time. I don't follow the sport much. Our local Bay Area team seems to be doing fairly well this year. And the nice thing is that once the playoffs are over, it will be hot enough in San Jose to turn the entire rink into flavored shave ice. We believe in recycling here.

[Pieter]

Bob - citing Salgado hardly impresses me. I'm not being a critic of his esthetic or social value, but let's face it, photojournalism is almost by definition, technique-wise, the art of machine-gunning. There simply isn't time to make critically sharp images like viewing a ground glass with a loupe provides. As more and more people switch to small digital cameras for convenience, as well as to save the cost of film when taking gazzilions of shots, a service like this seems a realistic business model. And it allows the use of actual b&W darkroom papers instead of inkjet. And yes, I've been aware of it for quite awhile. I just don't see it as a qualitative substitute for shooting real large format film to begin with. Number crunching, like Pere enjoys, doesn't tell the full story. It always seems that this kind of thing is described on a non-level playing field (or, in your case, an uneven ice hockey rink) - very pricey involved digital techniques versus garden-variety film results which haven't been optimized. But you're trying to find shortcuts to color separation negatives; and with big sheets of pan film now either cost-prohibitive or outright extinct, hybrid technique is obviously the way forward for large contact work. But I'm stuck in a particular gear for awhile, and getting really good results with Fujiflex prints all-optical style.

I want to be able to print images in my darkroom from a project that was shot digitally. Using a high-resolution full-frame digital camera, I can use lenses that are just not available for large format (16mm wide-angle for example). I usually choose the gear to match my needs. Grainless razor sharp large format is not always the solution for me. Besides, I like grain, Rodinal is my developer of choice.

[Pere Casals]

Bob - citing Salgado hardly impresses me. I'm not being a critic of his esthetic or social value, but let's face it, photojournalism is almost by definition, technique-wise, the art of machine-gunning.

Drew, a MF 645 camera in a rainforest, loaded with Tri-X 320 Pan, is not exactly a machinegun, following your criterion Cartier-Bresson also is not impressive...

We know yet that Genesis is an important reference in the history of photography, this is a work that will be remembered and studied for decades or centuries to come because of its top cultural and artistic value.

It portrays in an artistic way how world was before development, and what is to disapear to make people think, a powerful message in powerful art. It required traveling to the most remote spots in the world during many years. It was extenuating, at one point Salgado was phycologically destroyed.

There are many impressive sides in Genesis. One is post-processing made by Amazonas team, or the global exhibition or the Sumo edition made by Taschen. Not everyday Taschen makes a Sumo...

Fine Art is not more or less impressive than Street photography or Photojournalism, it mainly depends on what the photographer does, and on our preferences.

Salgado work apart, LVT was used for the Genesis $many millions production (in post 2007 shots), by a very skilled team using enlargers to make all prints of the global exhibition. What post-production team did is impressive.

[bob carnie]

I want to be able to print images in my darkroom from a project that was shot digitally. Using a high-resolution full-frame digital camera, I can use lenses that are just not available for large format (16mm wide-angle for example). I usually choose the gear to match my needs. Grainless razor sharp large format is not always the solution for me. Besides, I like grain, Rodinal is my developer of choice.

Pieter
using current technology and mixing with old process is IMHO the way to go.

this is a good option for you.. I have been making really nice wet prints from digital capture to digital inkjet negatives sized to print and then contacted ( and yes have been selling them to major galleries).. I have found that using Rubylith on the edges give a pure white with this method of printing.
Personally I think any style of creating images is worthy of Photography....
I understand Drew's viewpoint of personally satisfying himself with his process... I actually respect his knowledge as I have worked with complex printing stategies myself, actually since 1976 I have taken care of myself and family solely by printing for others...
BUT I do not think Brassai ever worried about his technique but rather his ability to tell a story with his photo's and he calculated his exposures by the length of time to finish a smoke and I consider his work to be in the top 5 of all time photographers.
I suggest you give the digital negative route a try as you will be amazed at how beautiful your prints are and do not worry about what the Print Sniffers have to say.

[bob carnie]

Drew, a MF 645 camera in a rainforest, loaded with Tri-X 320 Pan, is not exactly a machinegun, following your criterion Cartier-Bresson also is not impressive...

We know yet that Genesis is an important reference in the history of photography, this is a work that will be remembered and studied for decades or centuries to come because of its top cultural and artistic value.

It portrays in an artistic way how world was before development, and what is to disapear to make people think, a powerful message in powerful art. It required traveling to the most remote spots in the world during many years. It was extenuating, at one point Salgado was phycologically destroyed.

There are many impressive sides in Genesis. One is post-processing made by Amazonas team, or the global exhibition or the Sumo edition made by Taschen. Not everyday Taschen makes a Sumo...

Fine Art is not more or less impressive than Street photography or Photojournalism, it mainly depends on what the photographer does, and on our preferences.

Salgado work apart, LVT was used for the Genesis $many millions production (in post 2007 shots), by a very skilled team using enlargers to make all prints of the global exhibition. What post-production team did is impressive.

One of the problems with Genesis was that Salgado switched to a digital capture system early in the game when the systems available were not as sophisticated as today... His resulting prints were not anywhere as good as his enlarger based prints due to this fact.

Salgado has been a huge influence in our world today and has with his photography shown issues that are now facing us today with huge peril for our world if we do not smarten up... I am a huge fan of his work and I believe he has a strong place in our photographic history.

[Pieter]

In the end, a great photograph transcends process and technique.

[Pere Casals]

Besides, I like grain, Rodinal is my developer of choice. [/ATTACH]

Grain can be added to the digital image with several tools, DXO FilmPack (suposedly) was used in Genesis to match the digital shots with the TXP ones. Personally I prefer a pure optic process, and this is my way, but today digital edition tools allow to add fake grain of great aesthetic value, the strong point is that grain can be adjusted to suit the effect we want.

An important factor in Grain Structure is grain intensity depending on gray level, TX has more grain in the shadows while HP5+ has more in the mids. Experimenting with different grain structures / intensities in an image is quite interesting.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/125592...5/28286548926/

In the end, a great photograph transcends process and technique.

But process and technique can be an important factor in a great image. This is a YMMV...

Often a top artist is a master of his tools, not always.

[Pieter]

Grain can be added to the digital image with several tools, DXO FilmPack (suposedly) was used in Genesis to match the digital shots with the TXP ones. Personaly I prefer a pure optic process, and this is my way, but today digital edition tools allow to add fake grain of great aesthetic value, the strong point is that grain can be adjusted to suit the effect we want.

An important factor in Grain Structure is grain intensity depending on gray level, TX has more grain in the shadows while HP5+ has more in the mids. Experienting with different grain structures / intensities in an image is quite interesting.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/125592...5/28286548926/

I am assuming the LVT will have enough grain structure and I don't need to add anything more...especially since I am making the equivalent of a medium-format negative. I believe LVTs are made on Ilford Delta 100 or FP4+.




But process and technique can be an important factor in a great image. This is a YMMV...

Often a top artist is a master of his tools, not always.

[Pere Casals]

I am assuming the LVT will have enough grain structure and I don't need to add anything more...especially since I am making the equivalent of a medium-format negative. I believe LVTs are made on Ilford Delta 100 or FP4+.

Of course it would be possible using a film with grain, say TXP or HP5, and exploting that.

If you print MF size then you may print on cubic grain film... it is a choice... if the printing service offer that (they have made the calibrations), I don't know what they offer.


Normally you add fake grain, or use the grain (well) scanned from the negative, using the film own grain I guess it is a less suitable choice. A good choice for LVT printing is Delta 100, cheaper than TMX and little grain, then you may prefer adding the fake grain because you control it.

In Genesis they ended making an oversized 4x5 negative with little grain (D100) and adding well adjusted fake grain. I guess they wanted the oversized negative to not have a quality loss in the big prints, but the oversized negative would have not showed grain, so the choice was clear.

The LVT negative may have less resolving power than a negative shot with the camera, but and oversized negative is able to include more pixels...


__________________________

LVT gear can print on any film color, BW or slides. In fact LVT gear was made for color film, you can print Velvia sheets with nice colors, or negatives.


LVTs have a color wheel, you may use different colors to print Velvia than to print Portra...



http://www.lvt.coloraid.de/

[Drew Wiley]

More little Pixies running around doing what? Putting on Halloween costumes to pretend they're grain when they're not? (Just being Devil's advocate here, Pere - don't take it seriously).