kenneth Posted January 30, 2009 Share #1 Posted January 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I recently bought a Durst M670 enlarger s/hand and the guy at Durst UK was saying that the demand for s/hand enlargers has increased dramatically with the colleges here in the UK re-instating thier wet darkrooms as the tutors say that they cannot teach the rudiments of photography with digital alone Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Hi kenneth, Take a look here Is traditional processing making a comeback? . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted January 30, 2009 Share #2 Posted January 30, 2009 That's good news. I know that ffordes (other dealers are available!) don't have any at the moment, which is unusual. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 30, 2009 Share #3 Posted January 30, 2009 I know that ffordes (other dealers are available!) don't have any at the moment, which is unusual. I suspect they've stopped buying them. There hasn't been anything there for a while. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
summarod Posted January 30, 2009 Share #4 Posted January 30, 2009 I recently bought a Durst M670 enlarger s/hand and the guy at Durst UK was saying that the demand for s/hand enlargers has increased dramatically with the colleges here in the UK re-instating thier wet darkrooms as the tutors say that they cannot teach the rudiments of photography with digital alone Hello! This information confirms what a friend of mine has told me recently. His daughter is studying design/ arts in Paris and he had to give her a crash course in analogue development, because more than just basic knowledge was asked for, which came a bit unexpected. Fortunately he had not sold his R4 and a nice set of lenses. She did quite well, so far, I believe. best Wolfhard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cocker Posted January 30, 2009 Share #5 Posted January 30, 2009 I recently bought a Durst M670 enlarger s/hand and the guy at Durst UK was saying that the demand for s/hand enlargers has increased dramatically with the colleges here in the UK re-instating thier wet darkrooms as the tutors say that they cannot teach the rudiments of photography with digital alone I think thats the case Kenneth. On the occasions I'm in The Real Camera Shop in Manchester there are always one or two students buying film camers - mostly Medium Format. That's all to the good I think. And now I'm off to the Real Camera shop to haggle over a Mamiya RZ67!!!! Looks as though it will help on those days I can't go to the Gym Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henkie Posted January 30, 2009 Share #6 Posted January 30, 2009 I surely hope so ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wls.shanghai Posted January 30, 2009 Share #7 Posted January 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) .....no comeback for me ... I work analog only - the real thing (film = B&W and colour) ....if the Kodachrome 25 will comeback .... I will make with my wife a pilgrimage to Roma to meet the pope Regards wls Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted January 30, 2009 Author Share #8 Posted January 30, 2009 .....no comeback for me ... I work analog only - the real thing (film = B&W and colour) ....if the Kodachrome 25 will comeback .... I will make with my wife a pilgrimage to Roma to meet the pope Regards wls I agree, so would I and I'm an atheist- for atheist read Buddhist Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 30, 2009 Share #9 Posted January 30, 2009 How can an atheist be a Buddist? Just wondering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 30, 2009 Share #10 Posted January 30, 2009 I've followed the odd item on e bay. I started developing my own film again and of course that got me to thinking about dabbling with wet printing again although time will be my main limitation. Anyway, if something came up I thought......so I 'watched' several darkroom kits and they all sold for decent money. Same with most MF and especially LF gear too. Film and traditional photography is very much alive and well despite what some would have us beleive. Even Polaroid might be making a comeback! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattLain Posted January 30, 2009 Share #11 Posted January 30, 2009 There are still students in their second year of uni having to be reminded that pointing a meter at the bright sky will underexpose the ground! Clearly the unlimited capabilities of digital imaging is only useful if you have first learned the limited capabilities of a less advanced system, otherwise our future photographers will be walking into a profession blindfolded. Institutions that have 'shut down' their darkrooms must have either been incredibly naive or just plain stupid to even consider film might be something of the past. Only a few days ago I watched a documentary on Rankin attempting to recreate unforgettable fashion images between the 50's and 70's. Some from the likes Avedon and Bailey. As soon as Bailey introduced his Rolleiflex, Rankin exclaimed that he had never used one and didn't know how to load the film! I myself prefer to dabble in both old and new technologies, they work in completely different ways to the eye and conceptually. They demand equal respect, but for god's sake don't value one more than the other and never leave one to the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted January 30, 2009 Share #12 Posted January 30, 2009 As soon as Bailey introduced his Rolleiflex, Rankin exclaimed that he had never used one and didn't know how to load the film! Wise man to admit it! Loading a Rolleiflex is dead easy but not dead obvious even if you're used to roll film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted January 30, 2009 Share #13 Posted January 30, 2009 Kodachrome 25[/b] will comeback .... I will make with my wife a pilgrimage to Roma to meet the pope My tears are a little slower to fall since I stocked up.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent10D Posted January 30, 2009 Share #14 Posted January 30, 2009 How can an atheist be a Buddist? Just wondering. There is no creator or "God" in Buddhism, only philosophy. And just to stay OT, there does seem to be a lot of people both rediscovering traditional photographic methods and discovering them for the first time (younger folk, of course). That can only be good. Digital is here to stay, but there's a lot of mileage left in the "old way" yet, and a tremendous amount to learn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share #15 Posted January 31, 2009 How can an atheist be a Buddist? Just wondering. Buddhism is not a faith based religion it is a- theist and does not believe in a God or rely on a higher power to attain salvation. I have been a practicing Buddhist since the 70's linked mainly to Tibetan schools. I took refuge vows from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso who is the spiritual head of the NKT Buddhist Foundation. The New Kadampa Tradition is based in Ulverston in Cumbria where Geshe Kelsang is based Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 31, 2009 Share #16 Posted January 31, 2009 "Clearly the unlimited capabilities of digital imaging is only useful if you have first learned the limited capabilities of a less advanced system, otherwise our future photographers will be walking into a profession blindfolded. Institutions that have 'shut down' their darkrooms must have either been incredibly naive or just plain stupid to even consider film might be something of the past." I don't think this is so. ---------------------------- Free darkroom equipment - I am tired of looking at it. Beseler 45MCRX 4x5 enlarger - condenser and dichro color head, voltage stabilizer Negative carriers. No lenses for free. Digital and analog enlarging timers. Various easels including Saunders print and repeat. Arkay 20" wide RC print dryer - very heavy duty. Safelights Various processing tanks and reels. I also have a Calumet water bath heater and pump along with a tempered water bath. Misc. accessories - multi contrast filters, thermometers, tongs, etc. I am in the Washington DC area if anyone wants to stop by and take it off my hands. I don't think it is a good idea for students to bother to learn the film and darkroom processes. They can progress a lot faster in a digital environment. Learning the analog technology is simply a distraction and costly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattLain Posted January 31, 2009 Share #17 Posted January 31, 2009 I don't think this is so. The basics of digital technology may be taught faster than the basics of film, but to master digital technology is theoretically impossible. A system based on numbers and not a finite material will always have an unlimited number of new ways to work, depending on the 'data' available in the image and what one wants to do with it. This is not the way to learn. The best thing any student can do is get used to a single system, or find one that works for them, become consistent, develop a technique etc. Then expand on what they already know which is maybe where more technology would come in. For someone who hasn't yet approached making work in a professional manor, or what is understood to be of a high-degree the digital workflow will and does baffle them. Mostly because its main priority at the moment isn't even to educate people or make photographer's more competent, its there to make money (for manufacturers and photographers). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 31, 2009 Share #18 Posted January 31, 2009 The basics of digital technology may be taught faster than the basics of film, but to master digital technology is theoretically impossible. A system based on numbers and not a finite material will always have an unlimited number of new ways to work, depending on the 'data' available in the image and what one wants to do with it. This is not the way to learn. The best thing any student can do is get used to a single system, or find one that works for them, become consistent, develop a technique etc. Then expand on what they already know which is maybe where more technology would come in. For someone who hasn't yet approached making work in a professional manor, or what is understood to be of a high-degree the digital workflow will and does baffle them. Mostly because its main priority at the moment isn't even to educate people or make photographer's more competent, its there to make money (for manufacturers and photographers). Well, I guess your argument makes sense to you. What makes film so finite? I think it is more complicated than digital by far. And Kodak's main goal in the past wasn't to sell film and chemicals in order to make money? It is easier, less expensive, and faster to become competent with digital than it is with film. The same is true of mastery. For instance it is a lot easier and faster to become a "master" printer on an inkjet, than with Ilfochrome. I have taught photography in an all digital environment - CDIA, and I think it is the way to do it. Students pick it up really fast. Besides, everyone is, or needs to be, computer literate. So that is a given before they walk in the door. If students can quickly get comfortable with the technology of using a camera, they can spend more time learning how to do lighting, composition, etc. and have a chance to develop a personal vision. I can't see any point in having students invest the time and money in learning "yesterday's" technology. Working photographers have virtually no choice but to be shooting digitally or at least in a digital workflow if they shoot film. A year ago, I listed my darkroom on Craig's list - best offer. I got no responses. So far, I haven't even been able to give away my darkroom gear. My local camera store advises me to take it to the dump. What does that tell you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michiel Fokkema Posted January 31, 2009 Share #19 Posted January 31, 2009 last week I've met two people how are no shooting film instead of digital. They started wiht digital not even knowing there was such a thing as film. One bought a hasselblad and the other the Russian fake hasselblad. I think there still is a solid future for film, or at least I hope. Cheers, Michiel Fokkema Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 31, 2009 Share #20 Posted January 31, 2009 last week I've met two people how are no shooting film instead of digital. They started wiht digital not even knowing there was such a thing as film. One bought a hasselblad and the other the Russian fake hasselblad. I think there still is a solid future for film, or at least I hope. Cheers, Michiel Fokkema I would be hesitant to see two individuals as a trend. • Total sales at Kodak dropped by 5% in the third quarter of 2008, compared to the same three months last year. Overall sales from film capture and traditional photofinishing fell 18%. In this article, Koadk claims that some aspects of the film market have had a resurgence - TRI-X and Tmax among students. But if you read it you'll see that they are just happy that sales of those types of films have not declined as much as sales of other films. Kodak: Film is far from dead news - Amateur Photographer - news, camera reviews, lens reviews, camera equipment guides, photography courses, competitions, photography forums Kodak Claims Film Sales Growing | Gadget Lab from Wired.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.