Smoke 'n Mirrors Dept: Stretching the Truth (literally)

[amateriat]

From the "more real than real" labs:

http://tinyurl.com/35sgqt

Not for me, but oddly entertaining.


- Barrett

 

[peterm1]

I pride myself on being reasonably computer literate, but when I tried to download and install the various components to try them out I became totally lost - worse so when I read the instructions. While I would like to try this application somehow I do not think it is going to happen. Its not just a matter of downloading and unzipping a plug-in there are various libraries to install and the jargon used makes it sound Greek. (or perhaps Geek.)

 

[robster180]

...I work in the creative services industry and have for many years seen this going on, we have some extremely good Photoshop people in our studio who do the best retouching jobs - the ones you never see or suspect.

Anyway just thought I'd share with you one of my favourite marriages between photography and technology - stick with it, it's the 2nd half that wows!

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/129

 

[rxmd]

Anyway just thought I'd share with you one of my favourite marriages between photography and technology - stick with it, it's the 2nd half that wows!

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/129

Very good! Thanks for that link.

Makes you wonder what the place of film-based photography is; my impression is that because it will become increasingly detached from the way digital images are used, it will increasingly relegated to a position in society similar to oil-on-canvas paintings nowadays, as a distinguished elite medium practiced by people who fall into a spectrum between a few artists and a large number of relatively affluent amateurs.

Philipp

 

[rxmd]

Seriously, as film users we've already become a tiny niche. And as more and more use of images moves to the kind of stuff like Photosnyth, what we do when shooting film becomes less and less relevant. But as a hobby, why not? People build ships from toothpicks. Surely film based photography has at least as much value as building tiny wooden ships.

I agree. And on the other hand it becomes more and more special. Like people want to have their picture taken on film, because they feel it is something unusual and special and authentic. Already if you tell people you're using film, I'm beginning to notice that they appreciate it and interpret it as a sign that I'm somehow especially committed to what I'm doing.

Philipp

 

[robster180]

in my industry there's a shift to go more digital (i'm an animator and film maker) and I do most things digitally now due to budget and environmental issues, however we still make TV and cinema ads with film. Hiring film crews which specialise in film or digital is now a cost factor rather than a 'can do' one

 

[Sparrow]

That’s nothing, I have an OM1 with an MD that can stretch film

😱

 

[bsdunek]

Very good! Thanks for that link.

Makes you wonder what the place of film-based photography is; my impression is that because it will become increasingly detached from the way digital images are used, it will increasingly relegated to a position in society similar to oil-on-canvas paintings nowadays, as a distinguished elite medium practiced by people who fall into a spectrum between a few artists and a large number of relatively affluent amateurs.

Philipp

I agree. I like the artistic side. That's why I still wet print my B&W. There will be millions of digital photos taken every day, and only a few will be worth anything. Nothing has changed though. Remember Instamatics and such things. Lots of photos in envelopes in drawers than never see the light of day. Lots of 50 ft. rolls of 8mm movie film in the same situation. Now the photos languish on a hard drive until the computer is replaced. Most will be lost.
Anyone willing to work with film will probably have serious results (once in a while, anyway).
I love my digital for web use, and when I need quick photos, such as for my Wife's business - but I'd rather be in the darkroom. 😎

 

[Al Kaplan]

I have a friend who's taken his studio completely digital but a few times he's called me in to shoot something or somebody in wet process B&W because the client insisted on it. They were willing to pay through the nose! My friend, on the other hand, can't understand what all the fuss is about. He loves his over sharpened super saturated color portraits.

 

[palec]

rxmd, we are already dinosaurs with our film use. The only difference is, we - unlike the dinosaurs - know we are headed for extinction. 🙂

Sorry to interrupt your vision, but I'd like add something.

I see analogy (what a word) in analog vs. digital audio. No I'm not going to dust off popular CD vs. vinyl debate which is more like baryt vs. inkjet print debate. I mean analog vs. digital sound recording and processing.

Digital audio is here for more years than digital photography and brought really big changes, but still it has not killed the classic analog gear. I remember early attempts to do everything in digital and what happened? Many serious recording studios reintroduced magnetic tape recorder for mastering. Even recording of pure digital instruments is done via mics, tube preamps and compressors. What I see is that these technologies coexist next to each other.

Some large companies (Ampex/Quantegy) discontinued the magnetic tape manufacture, but smaller companies started the production again (ATR) while one (RMGI) declared their dedication to tape like Ilford did to B&W photography. It's not big business anymore, but lives and has it's meaning.

Sure, cassettes as a mass medium has lost it's position to MP3, same as 35mm film compact cameras to digital compacts. But does this says anything about aesthetics. I doubt. Talk with audio engineer and tell him he's dinosaur because he uses magnetic tape in his workflow. Expect laugh 🙂 Especially when he/she just finished next award-winning album.

Sorry for long post and my English, I'm not native speaker.