Magnum and the Dying Art of Darkroom Printing

And who says it is dying? True, a lot of bad photographers have resorted to digital, lining up like Lemmings, but how many of them were any good at darkroom printing, anyway? One can still find a brand new real Samurai or Viking hand-made sword if one looks around and all the second-raters have left the scene. I, like a lot of people, am building a new darkroom after not having one for 30-plus years. Have you figured all of us and those who will follow in your assumptions?.
 
I think, in all fairness to the OP, he posted the title of the actual article as the title of his post. And it is not dying, but it is becoming rare and difficult to do outside of bigger centres because publicly accessible darkrooms have mostly disappeared. For example, there are no darkrooms left at the college, the university, or the art school in the town I live in. So, unless you can build your own, making prints is near impossible. I am lucky to have access to a darkroom, but I would love to be able to actually learn from people who are much better than me at it without having to fly somewhere for a workshop. So I agree, darkroom printing is not necessarily dying, but it is becoming very much a niche art form.
 
I am fascinated by Inirio's notations, I assume his own system. I am trying to figure out what he is doing. Obviously reminders for dodging and burning, I assume some numbers (0, 2, 4) are contrast filter used.

I am in awe.

Randy
 
We're the exception, not the rule. I am just posting the title of the post, not my opinion. I thought it was an interesting read. And BTW, it is a dying art. We're no longer the norm. We're now being considered a cult. I live in NYC. At one time there was a "photo district". It no longer exists. At one time almost all of W. 32nd street between 6th and 7th Avenues was populated by photo/camera stores, selling cameras and darkroom supplies. That is no longer the case. None are there anymore, including Willoughby's which moved and is just a small outlet of what it used to be. Where is Olden, Camera Barn Stores, Executive Photo to name a few? Sure there were others all through the city, but they are mostly gone as well. Now we have have the superstore - B & H, Adorama. The small camera shops no longer sell darkroom supplies.
 
I used to consider myself a decent B&W printer (my first teachers put a premium on darkroom craft and print quality) but Inirio's marked up prints indicate a much greater degree of selective control than I ever attempted. On the other hand, they also illustrate how crude the process is compared to something like photoshop. Doing that kind of stuff on a computer is not just easier, it really is better.
 
squareshooter said:
True, a lot of bad photographers have resorted to digital, lining up like Lemmings, but how many of them were any good at darkroom printing, anyway?
Click to expand...

Anyone who took classes before 2000 had to be decent at darkroom printing... it was the only way to get your prints.

To some of us, digital just fits our lifestyle and what we expect from photography better... it's not a brainless choice.
 
gns said:
I used to consider myself a decent B&W printer (my first teachers put a premium on darkroom craft and print quality) but Inirio's marked up prints indicate a much greater degree of selective control than I ever attempted. On the other hand, they also illustrate how crude the process is compared to something like photoshop. Doing that kind of stuff on a computer is not just easier, it really is better.
Click to expand...

I totally feel the same way..my friends in college considered me one of the better B&W printers in class and yeah I enjoyed it in school. After school was done for a short time I even printed for another photographer. I have my own darkroom at my folks which I rarely use these days mostly for B&W film developing which I don't do much of since I shoot a lot more color these days. Yes, you have so much more control and precision in the "digital darkroom" it really is a no brainer..
 
Yes, 47th Street Photo was the first of the big retail discounters.

BTW, I worked at Camera Barn for 5 years back in the late 70s-early 80s. They bought Hirsch Photo after he lost his shop due to gambling debts!
 
The title of the article is confusing, because the article itself is more about Magnum, not about "dying art of darkroom printing."

Magnum does not represent the darkroom printing "culture" nor "interest" nor "discipline" in any scope outside of their own.

Plenty of people who never done film before digital showed up end up building their own darkroom today, I'm one of them. So I have no nostalgic reasons, just an honest-to-goodness fascination on the whole process and the resulting prints.
 
gns said:
On the other hand, they also illustrate how crude the process is compared to something like photoshop. Doing that kind of stuff on a computer is not just easier, it really is better.
Click to expand...

Adobe Illustrator shows how crude pencil drawing or oil painting is too, but that does not make oil painters want to bin the Grumbachers and buy a new Mac Pro with a Wacom tablet. We all want different things out of life, I want to sell my customers the best photograph they can get from me and that is real hand crafted photography, not anyone-can-do-it Compu-prints. You will do your best work with what you love to use the most. For me, that is black and white film expertly printed on silver gelatin coated fiber based paper, one print at a time, individual character traits and all...

And no, it is not a dying art, it is dying as a technological mainstay and now being allowed to become a true art form.
 
That article was certainly interesting, thanks a lot for sharing. I enjoy printing in my darkroom but I am just now getting started with darkroom printing so I don't even compare to Inirio. I suspect there are very few people around who do compare to him.

But I also print digitally and I do not consider it to be a secondary form of printing, just different. There is skill as well as true art involved in developing a beautiful inkjet print just as there obviously is in developing a darkroom print.

They are each different but each discipline produces a print. And a master printer is truly valuable for the rest of us no matter which discipline is involved.
 
Back to the article and the very interesting marked-up print.

Does anyone know the meaning of the markings? Obviously they are about dodging and burning, but what are the numbers?
 
Pioneer said:
........There is skill as well as true art involved in developing a beautiful inkjet print just as there obviously is in developing a darkroom print.

They are each different but each discipline produces a print. And a master printer is truly valuable for the rest of us no matter which discipline is involved.
Click to expand...

Well said and as ColSebastianMoran says - back to the OP's post

Seems some of the notations could well be times for dodging and burning - could others also include variable contrast filter levels?
 
The obsession with process is the last refuge of the intellectually shallow. The photographer with nothing to say, no vision, screams from the rooftop about how he's a "Real" photographer because he uses (insert process here). Let me clue you guys in on a few things:

1) No one who matters gives a damn if you use film or digital, or what printing process you use. People will buy your work if they like the image. If they don't, no amount of shaking your fist at the sky and yelling at the kids to get off your lawn will make them like your work.

2) There is no such thing as a "Hand-Made" photograph. Its a form of art where we use materials made in big factories by scientists and engineers. Same goes for our equipment. Sculpture, drawing, painting..those are done by hand. We photographers 'draw' using lenses none of us can make ourselves, and those lenses impose themselves greatly on the final image through their image forming characteristics (sharpness, bokeh, tone and color rendering, etc). The claim of selling handmade photographs is intellectually dishonest. If you have to resort to such chicanery to make your work look good, you might as well give up. You've failed as an artist.
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
Back to the article and the very interesting marked-up print.

Does anyone know the meaning of the markings? Obviously they are about dodging and burning, but what are the numbers?
Click to expand...

I used to mark up work prints like that too, before my health problems made me quit the darkroom. The numbers tell how much to dodge or burn. I'm not sure what units they used on these, could be seconds or stops of exposure. not sure. I marked mine in seconds. I'd have the overall exposure (eg. 25 seconds at f8) marked, then would mark + or - seconds to add or subtract in my dodging and burning.
 
squareshooter said:
True, a lot of bad photographers have resorted to digital, lining up like Lemmings, but how many of them were any good at darkroom printing, anyway? ........ Have you figured all of us and those who will follow in your assumptions?.
Click to expand...

Who is making assumptions? :D
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
The obsession with process is the last refuge of the intellectually shallow. The photographer with nothing to say, no vision, screams from the rooftop about how he's a "Real" photographer because he uses (insert process here). Let me clue you guys in on a few things:

1) No one who matters gives a damn if you use film or digital, or what printing process you use. People will buy your work if they like the image. If they don't, no amount of shaking your fist at the sky and yelling at the kids to get off your lawn will make them like your work.

2) There is no such thing as a "Hand-Made" photograph. Its a form of art where we use materials made in big factories by scientists and engineers. Same goes for our equipment. Sculpture, drawing, painting..those are done by hand. We photographers 'draw' using lenses none of us can make ourselves, and those lenses impose themselves greatly on the final image through their image forming characteristics (sharpness, bokeh, tone and color rendering, etc). The claim of selling handmade photographs is intellectually dishonest. If you have to resort to such chicanery to make your work look good, you might as well give up. You've failed as an artist.
Click to expand...


Sorry Chris, but I have to disagree. You see, being a creative photographer is not mutually exclusive to being a talented darkroom craftsman, (and because technical manipulations carried out in the darkroom are based on an eye towards ascetics, it can be considered an art in and of itself.)

It's like the tried discussion on old RFF, that you are either a collector OR a photographer, when reasonably one CAN be both. Not mutually exclusive.


Also, I've been considering, as a working concept, the idea that art IS in the process.

But art is so idiosyncratic and personal, that any general comment made will find a plethora of valid exceptions.

Chris, it seems from your experience, you were forced to abandon wet printing due to health considerations. Would you have continued with that process if this didn't happen!
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
1) No one who matters gives a damn if you use film or digital, or what printing process you use. People will buy your work if they like the image.
Click to expand...

Well that has always been my experience. It's been my experience with museum curators and gallery people who know about printing as well as "just folks" who don't know the difference between an inkjet and wet print.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom