Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I raise my ponderous avoirdupois to my creaky old feet to counter- I found that metering, at least with the system I use, I can get a relatively decent print with the first or second time- and it at least puts me in the 'ballpark' for any further dodging or burning. Sure- if you live to be in the darkroom, it's fine I guess, but even though I 'like' darkroom work- it pales to actually taking pictures, and if I can get acceptable results, and the look I want with an enlarging meter, and save some time and paper in the -process, then smack me down and call me Wilma. I don't denigrate anyone's particular method; this is an artistic science, or scientific art (depending on your outlook!) and there is ALWAYS a subjective component to photography. It's all about YOUR vision.. I think you could safely say that the only absolute in photography is that it IS subjective. So while I don't think any less of Mark, et al for liking the totally manual approach, I would hope you guys realize that some of us find gratification in doing another way. Dan ( I did it MY way....!) Post - ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Brick <jimbrick@photoaccess.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>; <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 9:36 AM Subject: [Leica] Doing it manually, using the gray matter computer. > At 12:57 PM 6/9/00 -0700, Mark Rabiner wrote: > > > >So this is why fine art printers tend to do things the old fashioned way. It's > >not because they can't afford high tech meters and densitometers and closed > >loop systems. It's because although numbers are wonderful they dont' > compete with > >hard copy in hand results. > > > >Short haired not so fat Mark Rabiner > > > If you look back at all of the "master" photographers (those who did their > own darkroom work) you'll find that the majority of them used the manual > system. Perhaps all of them. Test strips, dodging & burning, and bleaching. > Visually looking at printed results. First wet, then dry. > > I've read Phil Davis' BTZS and CTein's stuff. It is very impressive but all > those plots. By the time you get finished plotting a film emulsion to a > paper emulsion, you've both run out of film and paper and you are sick of > all those numbers. So then you just print your stuff the way you always have. > > Test strips, dodging & burning, and bleaching. > > And then it's fun again. > > Jim