View Single Post
Old December 15th, 2012, 03:03 PM   #50 (permalink)
Bob Maxey
Senior Member
Bob Maxey's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,837
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 381
Thanked 811 Times in 641 Posts

Originally Posted by ajdroidx View Post
You are right. Too much photoshopping, not enough actually "trying to get it right in the camera"
To be fair, let's look at the PS generation Vs. The Old Farts. I am an old fart that believes PS is fine if you are a good photographer to begin with and you are capable of creating a great image.

You know, if we had to drive across the state to photograph a new building, we usually took one or perhaps two film holders. We often bracketed if we thought there might be a problem.

If we were photographing a group, we often used banquet cameras and in some cases, the Kodak Circuit Cameras. Very costly to shoot five or ten 8 inch rolls of film. For the most part, we used 8 x 10 because 4 x 5 was too small.

We also knew lab accidents occasionally happen. But we did not excessively bracket because we had skills. This idea of just shooting all over the place and then being able to fix it in PS later is the mark of a crappy photographer.

In my day, we sometimes processed by inspection. That means desensitizing the film with some toxic chemicals so you can process it visually in the darkroom under the safelight.

When I printed large negatives, I used a Morse Contact Printer. I could switch individual lights on or off. If I needed more control, I would use paper negatives or tissue paper. Tissue was widely used back in the day and basically, you placed a tissue between the lights and glass and using a lead pencil, you darkened parts of the tissue to control light.

We processed some negatives using water bath development. We did this when we knew there was a potential problem. We could process for the highlights or the shadows. Normal development was not ideal and water baths let shadow detains form.

You can photograph a large, brightly lit light against a sheet of newspaper and if dome properly, you end up with a negative that shows the individual filaments as well as the newspaper text, and you do not need to dodge and burn.

We also dodged and burned using fingers, paddles, whatever we needed to control paper exposure. We used developers like Selectol Soft to create softer images. We used toners and we hand colored prints.

We did many of the things PS users do. Not much difference except this: we were skilled behind the camera and in the darkroom. I am not saying I was ever a brilliant photographer, but I was a brilliant printer and I know how to properly expose a negative.

We OFs and PS'ers are often doing the same things but we love to argue with each other. Clearly, the past has much to offer the new working pro who know nothing. that said, no digital photographer really need to know what Dektol is or when you need to use a Wratten 98.
Bob Maxey is offline  
Reply With Quote