The death of analogue photography.

Well I did try to reduce the flaming by steering and going off topic mentioning a Canon printer and MF\LF lens perspective...erm but it didn't work :(
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
As the saying goes: "it takes two to tango". What I see here is a mixture of people who "know" they're right and assume an air of superiority which is calculated to anger the people who hold different opinions. As I see it, if you want to use film, be it in a Minox or a Gandolfi: go for it. If you want to use digital: the same.

There are discussions to be had and lessons that each can take from the other but only if everyone starts from respecting the other person's choices. There is no right or wrong in photography, just what works for each of us.
Click to expand...

Quite. Why some individuals have decided to get a bee in their bonnet about imagined slights, I have no idea. Regardless of format, ALL photography is valid. The 'phone snappers taking pics of famous landmarks, or sunsets, landscapes etc, have those pioneers who toiled with their large format cams, glass plates etc, to create the genres that inspire us today, and we have a lot to learn about the cultural and social values of 'selfies' by teenage kids etc. I had hoped posting up some comments by Don McCullin, regarding the notion of 'truth' in analogue and digital photographs, might spark some interesting discourse. Instead, it appears some still have sour grapes over things that were unsaid. :(
 
AZ6 said:
Quite. Why some individuals have decided to get a bee in their bonnet about imagined slights, I have no idea. Regardless of format, ALL photography is valid. The 'phone snappers taking pics of famous landmarks, or sunsets, landscapes etc, have those pioneers who toiled with their large format cams, glass plates etc, to create the genres that inspire us today, and we have a lot to learn about the cultural and social values of 'selfies' by teenage kids etc. I had hoped posting up some comments by Don McCullin, regarding the notion of 'truth' in analogue and digital photographs, might spark some interesting discourse. Instead, it appears some still have sour grapes over things that were unsaid. :(
Click to expand...

erm what about Thomas Heaton saying "I find nothing helps with composition more than a sqaure frame".
 
excalibur2 said:
erm what about Thomas Heaton saying "I find nothing helps with composition more than a sqaure frame".
Click to expand...

I don't really know what that has to do with a discussion about 'the death of analogue photography' (other than the fact he's talking about a Hasselblad film cam), tbh. But you could start a thread based on it, if you wanted.
 
REAL men use wet plate; REAL HARD men use Daguerrotype. You've never lived till you've used mercury vapour as a developer....
 
That is probably the only negative of the Daguerrotype :)
 
Ooo, we could have an endless and utterly pointless wet plate vs dry plate debate

And we could throw in a my-plate-is-wetter-than-yours argument too
 
I prefer to put food on dry plates....

Wet plates (just going off into an irrelevant-to-eating tangent) the wet plate process does serve to remind us that large format photographers don't have to spend hours over setting up and making an exposure. Sometimes they couldn't.

So dry plates and film are responsible for photography losing sponteneity.
 
Asha said:
And softies use Di...... oh never mind [emoji23]
Click to expand...

Naturally. The (gum) Di...chromate process absolutely depends on softness (in parts) :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top