lZr
L&M
Since software tools are better and better and accessible to anyone, is retouching the original negs is of any interest? I doubt, but mau be I am wrong? I remember times our city pro photographer earn his living by retouching negs or the final prints....
Look at this roll shot by William Klein (pp 353, 20th Century Photography, Taschen)
Entrance to the Sumo Arena, Tokyo, 1987
William Klein [ born 1928, New York. Lives in Paris ( I hope so ) ]
Look at this roll shot by William Klein (pp 353, 20th Century Photography, Taschen)
Entrance to the Sumo Arena, Tokyo, 1987
William Klein [ born 1928, New York. Lives in Paris ( I hope so ) ]
fishtek
Don
I did some print retouching once upon a time, but wouldn't even THINK about doing it now. To me, "retouching" a negative just meant preliminary cropping or marking for dodge/burn work. Both activities weren't much fun...
Regards!
Don
Regards!
Don
lZr
L&M
...and observing the frame with loupe...
charjohncarter
Veteran
It probably was an 'Art' but if you asked about retouching in a US newsroom today: whaa? For you outside the US 'whaa' is the new 'what.'
gb hill
Veteran
lZr said:
I was looking at a loupe the other day. I have never had one but thought sense I am going to be developing some B&W soon, it might be nice to view negs this way. Whats the main purpose for using a loupe? and what maginification is sutible for 35mm? The one I looked at is an 8x. which stated was good for 4x5. Is this ok?
OldNick
Well-known
My late father-in-law retouched 5x7 portrait negatives routinely. He used VERY sharp pencils to fill in flaws with tiny dots. As I use Photoshop to do the same, I often wonder what he would think of today's photographic tools.
Jim N.
Jim N.
lZr
L&M
gb you are right. Nearly impossible to retouch 35 mm negative. 8x is gorgeous size. I use loupe for observing slides only and on light illuminated table. You can see over or underexposures promptly. Like sitemistic I remember our pro photomeister retoushing 4x5 sepia portraits developed in his lab. Artwork, indeed.
lZr
L&M
charjohncarter - I was 18 years old while emigrated to Israel from Bulgaria, but restoushing was already known trick in Israel
Bryce
Well-known
I think anyone who prints in a wet darkroom is forced to deal with retouching on some level some of the time. There's no such thing as a perfect negative; a piece of dust you just can't get off, a speck that seems like was in the film before exposure. I have to deal with these sometimes. I use Spotone, water colors, and pencils. Just hiding blemishes, though- not altering the content of the print.
Materially changing a print's content, or working on a 35mm or medium format negative? No chance for me, but I'm guessing someone with very steady hands and strong incentive managed it at one time.
Materially changing a print's content, or working on a 35mm or medium format negative? No chance for me, but I'm guessing someone with very steady hands and strong incentive managed it at one time.
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Bryce said:
You're bringing back some bad memories for me.
Spotting was Not fun! So bad for me it's to the point that "spotting" in PS is actually fun compared to that chore/headache! The only negative retouching I ever did was on high contrast film, using red opaque paint. @the OP, what am I missing in the William Klein photo?
.
lZr
L&M
Oy RayPa. I want to see again (when at home) the Che Gevara negative from same book I mentioned. It is original, not retoushed
jolefler
Established
OMG! You mean I'm one of the few who's still spotting prints with a brush!?!
No, no negatives these days. Back when it was 4X5 & larger, but 35 negs aren't practical and you'll probably still need to spot the print.
I like the old Kodak dried dye more than Spotone. I can blend black/sepia & white together as needed to cover minute black scratches on the print with these. Nice!
As I've stated before, my only method of e-reproducing prints is to do a copy photo with a digi-cam. That usually means spotting again with photo software....aaarrrggg! enough already!!
No, no negatives these days. Back when it was 4X5 & larger, but 35 negs aren't practical and you'll probably still need to spot the print.
I like the old Kodak dried dye more than Spotone. I can blend black/sepia & white together as needed to cover minute black scratches on the print with these. Nice!
As I've stated before, my only method of e-reproducing prints is to do a copy photo with a digi-cam. That usually means spotting again with photo software....aaarrrggg! enough already!!
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
I spend a lot of time retouching prints with my stash of Spotone (I'll be sad when I run out!). When printing for clients, I only retouch exhibition quality final prints- never negatives. I will sometimes retouch my own medium and large format negatives if they really need it, but I wouldn't think about touching 35mm negs- talk about an excercise in masochism and frustration.