Stealth3kpl Posted May 28, 2012 Share #41 Posted May 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) kodak 1a hazy lens...sticky shutter..but still makes an image...crap quality only in the eyes of the beholder andy I know what you mean. Optical aberrations, light leaks, guessing exposure, trying different films, feeling the life of a mechanical camera on pressing the shutter button, messing around with chemicals, seeing wonderful results whether planned or by accident. Whenever I'm asked why not switch to digital?", I have to ask "What, and miss out on all the fun?" Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Hi Stealth3kpl, Take a look here Why don't you just switch to digital?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bill Posted May 28, 2012 Share #42 Posted May 28, 2012 I'd like to suggest that, instead of the teeth-grindingly awful "analog(ue)" those of us who genuinely enjoy using film adopt instead the more appropriarte term "artisanal" - like baking bread, we get our hands on fun by being an integral part of a gloriously chemical process, working directly and intimately with the raw materials to achieve the desired end result from the sweat of our own brow. Just a thought... Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted May 28, 2012 Share #43 Posted May 28, 2012 I'd like to suggest that, instead of the teeth-grindingly awful "analog(ue)" those of us who genuinely enjoy using film adopt instead the more appropriarte term "artisanal" - like baking bread, we get our hands on fun by being an integral part of a gloriously chemical process, working directly and intimately with the raw materials to achieve the desired end result from the sweat of our own brow. Just a thought... Not unless you coat your own plates. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted May 28, 2012 Share #44 Posted May 28, 2012 More like an armadillo... I plate my own coats Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted May 28, 2012 Share #45 Posted May 28, 2012 Whilst camping in Florida, my Funyuns were stolen by an Armadillo. Just sayin'.... Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
too old to care Posted May 29, 2012 Share #46 Posted May 29, 2012 When I lived in Texas (Lubbock) I often saw dead armadillos on the highway. I was told they migrate there to die. Sorry for the hijack. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemix Posted May 29, 2012 Share #47 Posted May 29, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nice article. I like both. Obviously, for different reasons. So do I. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted May 29, 2012 Share #48 Posted May 29, 2012 Film is Caravaggio. Digital is Norman Rockwell. (I had NO idea what I was stepping into. I feel like I lit up a cigarette in a 3 pack a day former smokers house) I wouldn't take my sig too seriously if I were you - in any case, maybe you prefer Norman Rockwell to Caravaggio? I shoot both film and digital (I actually work with digital media), and there are times when that clinical, rather boring Rockwell look is the one you want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sterlinstarlin Posted May 29, 2012 Share #49 Posted May 29, 2012 Real film photographers mine their own silver and make their own gelatin. The rest of you are just phonies! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gberger Posted May 30, 2012 Share #50 Posted May 30, 2012 "Digital Photography is like shaved legs on a man - very smooth and clean but there is something acutely disconcerting about it." (unknown author) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted May 31, 2012 Share #51 Posted May 31, 2012 "Digital Photography is like shaved legs on a man - very smooth and clean but there is something acutely disconcerting about it." (unknown author) :D :D Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted May 31, 2012 Share #52 Posted May 31, 2012 I'd like to suggest that, instead of the teeth-grindingly awful "analog(ue)" those of us who genuinely enjoy using film adopt instead the more appropriarte term "artisanal" - like baking bread, we get our hands on fun by being an integral part of a gloriously chemical process, working directly and intimately with the raw materials to achieve the desired end result from the sweat of our own brow. Just a thought... Regards, Bill I think "Chemical Photography" is a good description of the process, at least that is what I prefer to call the film/developing/printing process. Film emulsions are digital/binary to the the extent that each film grain is either "on" or "off", film most certainly is not analog(ue). WRT "chemical" I recall quite a few cases of pollution of rivers by film manufacturers/developers - less problematic in recent times for obvious reasons. Still I will (also) use film as long as it is available. Baking my own bread again is on my to do list and in that case "artisanal" sounds about right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted May 31, 2012 Share #53 Posted May 31, 2012 Film emulsions are digital/binary to the the extent that each film grain is either "on" or "off", film most certainly is not analog(ue). This is completely and utterly WRONG. Film grain is absolutely not 'on' or 'off'. Read the following blog post. Photo Utopia: Clumps and Chumps (or why film isn't binary) I'm frankly sick and tired of seeing this lie bandied about - even printed by a so-called 'expert' in LFI. It's totally incorrect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted May 31, 2012 Share #54 Posted May 31, 2012 This is completely and utterly WRONG. Film grain is absolutely not 'on' or 'off'. Read the following blog post. Photo Utopia: Clumps and Chumps (or why film isn't binary) From the article:"Film emulsions are generally Ag/Br/I atoms combined into crystals from about 1 - 10 microns in size which are stacked in layers and dispersed randomly throughout the emulsion. They contain millions of atoms and many sensitivity specks which consist of sulfur and gold." Gold? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted May 31, 2012 Share #55 Posted May 31, 2012 Gold? Are you questioning the science, the research or the conclusion of the blogpost? Do you think that film is binary? Is a film grain only 'on' or 'off'? If you have an issue with the chemistry in the blogpost then I'm willing to hear it, but the author would be a better and more qualified person to discuss with (he used to post here, but for some obscure reason he no longer bothers). Let me know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 31, 2012 Share #56 Posted May 31, 2012 I think he's questioning how much gold there is in film emulsion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted May 31, 2012 Share #57 Posted May 31, 2012 I think he's questioning how much gold there is in film emulsion. Questioning the accuracy of the blog by Pico's sort of post strikes me as underhand. If there's an issue with the accuracy of the science, then the straight thing to do is get in touch with the author imho. And by all means report the correct information here. If he wants to contradict the point that I was making, then I'm more than willing to stand up for my contention that film grain is absolutely not binary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 31, 2012 Share #58 Posted May 31, 2012 IF there is no gold in film emulsion (if there is, that's the first time I have ever heard of it), then one has to question the accuracy of the rest of the blog, surely? I am sure that Pico can answer for himself, but that's what it looks like he is questioning to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted May 31, 2012 Share #59 Posted May 31, 2012 Location of latent image Depending on the silver halide crystal, the latent image may be formed inside or outside of the crystal. Depending on where the LI is formed, the photographic properties and the response to developer vary. Current emulsion technology allows very precise manipulation of this factor by a number of ways. Each emulsion has a place within each crystal where LI's are formed preferentially. They are called "sensitivity centers." Emulsions that form LI in the interior are called internal(ly) sensitive emulsions, and those that form LI on the surface are called surface sensitive emulsions. The sensitivity type largely reflects the site of very shallow electron traps that form latent images effectively. Most, if not all, old technology negative film emulsions had many unintentionally created edge dislocation sites (and other crystalline defects) internally and sulfur sensitization was performed on the surface of the crystal. Because multiple sensitivity centers are present, the emulsion had both internal and surface sensitivity. That is, photoelectrons may migrate to one of many sensitivity centers. In order to exploit the maximum sensitivity of such emulsions, it is generally considered that the developer must have some silver halide solvent action to make the internal latent image sites accessible. Many modern negative emulsions introduce a layer just under the crystal surface where a sufficient number of edge dislocation is intentionally created, while maintaining the bulk of the crystal interior defect-free. Chemical sensitization (e.g., sulfur plus gold sensitization) is applied on the surface. As a result, the photoelectrons are concentrated to a few sensitivity sites on or very near the crystal surface, thereby greatly enhancing the efficiency with which the latent image is produced. Latent image - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 31, 2012 Share #60 Posted May 31, 2012 Thank you Pete (x2) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.