[Leica] Film Lab
Dan Khong
dankhong at gmail.com
Thu Jun 8 04:32:14 PDT 2017
Mark
You are such a smart chap and I cannot possibly outdo you in your way with
words.
All I know is that my B&W negatives that I souped in 1968 are still doing
fine in my dry cabinet. They will still be there when I bite the dust and
maybe even you as well. Chances are when you and I bite our dusts, our
digital files will go along soon after.
I love handling and looking at physical stuffs and that includes negatives
and prints. I like the analog workflow process from which I derive great
satisfaction.
In the meantime, you are entitled to your views and I am entitled to mine.
Civilized men should always agree to disagree.
Have a nice day.
Dan K.
On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
> Robert, other people’s personal memories are great I’m all for them
> there’s not much I can say about them but when I read “And my negatives
> will serve as my archival backup.” That’s a trigger for me. It’s an issue
> important to me which brought me to write what I wrote.
> His more full quote being:
> “I just souped a roll of Tri-X and waiting to send it to the pro-lab to
> have it scanned into digital. After that, I have the options of two work
> processes — digital and analog. And my negatives will serve as my archival
> backup.”
>
> It’s my point again that his negatives will probably bite the dust long
> before his digital files. Thinking of one’s negatives like this as an
> archival backup is being encouraged widely and is one of those alt-true
> truths. As in its just not true at all.
> And the idea that we must only respond to the main idea of a post and not
> the part of it which we have something to say about I don’t has ever been
> expressed or been in effect.
> I’m sure the archives are full of people responding to the point in a post
> which they have something to say something about.
>
> One reason why digital scanning and Photoshoping is such a nice thing is
> we can take our faded damaged off color old negatives and prints and scan
> them and process them and make them look much younger. We can restore
> them. We have the technology
> There are people who specialize in in restoration they used to have their
> own place in the yellow pages and can do a better job of that then we
> probably can. Had those negatives or prints been digital captures the
> restoration people are out of business. It’s a main plus of the digital
> process and workflow. I hate to see more and more people get that turned
> around.
> Preservation of silver gelatin prints and negs is a tough ongoing job
> which is most often done way wrong if not ignored. It’s a shoebox in the
> bottom drawer.
> Preservation of Digital files is not a roll in the hay but is way easier
> to do partly because its possible to do. Digital files don’t fade. They
> don’t have to be kept in the dark in a humidity controlled room and
> handeled with white cotton gloves.
> --
>
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photographer
>
> On 6/7/17, 10:31 PM, "LUG on behalf of Robert Adler" <lug-bounces+mark=
> rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ahh Mark, you missed Dan's point. Shooting/developing analogue brings
> back
> memories. I agree with much of what you post, but it is irrelevant to
> anything Dan said...
> But that's ok..
>
>
> Bob Adler
> www.robertadlerphotography.com
> *"Capturing Light One Frame At A Time"*
>
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I’ve seen this a lot on the internet and it’s not true or don’t
> agree with
> > it… it’s not true. But it’s really out there being passed around big
> time
> > and achieving some unfortunate credulity as that’s how information
> spreds
> > now. The better virus wins. And you never know which Meme will fly
> and
> > which will die.
> > And that’s this backing up to analog as if chemistry based stuff is
> more
> > archival than digital. Or just thinking you are covered if you have
> a film
> > or paper copy of something.
> > When we all first heard about this new digital thing coming out the
> basic
> > idea behind the whole thing was the advantage of digital is its
> digital.
> > You make a copy of the thing and the it’s a clone not a copy. It’s
> the
> > same only it exists in a different space. For photography that’s
> > revolutionary. Because in the past when make a copy of a negative or
> of a
> > print and hold them side by side and they are no way identical. The
> “copy”
> > of the thing in most cases is a sad joke. So, you try to avoid
> copies. You
> > cover yourself as you’re shooting. You go “click” a bunch of times
> not just
> > once or twice. The best copy or backup is another origional.
> > More to the point is the reality that the minute your film is dry or
> your
> > print is dry it starts decomposing; leaking gasses, fading, and
> staining,
> > changing color. Film and prints exist in the organic carbon based
> world
> > just like people and trees. Film is made from dead bunnies (the
> gelatin).
> > Prints are made from that and cotton and wood. Just like people they
> are
> > dying the minute they are born. Returning to the earth from whence
> they
> > came…
> > So your film based print and the film itself is not the same image as
> > every day goes by. Every day in every way your print is worser and
> worser.
> > Film too. Not as much.
> > This is a main advantage not disadvantage of digital. It’s a plus
> check
> > not a minus. You could claim to hate the “digital look” but go with
> it
> > anyway because it lasts forever. Its digital. Other than the small
> > possibility of an isolated file getting corrupted when you go to your
> > digital file to Photoshop it again to print it or put it up on the
> internet
> > again a decade or so later you’re NOT dealing with a faded different
> > version of the thing. In digital if you can get that single file
> open it’s
> > the same file you dealt the first-time decades going by. Not one
> 100000th
> > of a percent different.
> > And if that file doesn’t open you grab another older backup hard
> disk and
> > it will.
> > In the past decade, my digital body of work is on hard disks and
> right
> > here near me. My chemical body of work is in a storage cubicle with
> fumes
> > coming out of each and every print and neg and slide. I’ve not seen
> it in
> > a few days I hope to soon and I don’t pass out from the gasses as I
> open
> > the door.
> > By the way if one print or roll of film is under fixed or under
> washed it
> > gives off a lot more and nastier gases than the stuff which was
> properly
> > fixed and washed sitting near it or in the same closet. So, the
> properly
> > processed stuff is probably fading at an accelerated rate too.
> > The chemical analog workflow is messy. The advantages are hard to
> find.
> > And if there are any advantages to film archivalness is not one of
> them.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Mark William Rabiner
> > Photographer
> >
> > On 6/7/17, 4:14 AM, "LUG on behalf of Dan Khong" <lug-bounces+mark=
> > rabinergroup.com at leica-users.org on behalf of dankhong at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I just souped a roll of Tri-X and waiting to send it to the
> pro-lab to
> > have
> > it scanned into digital. After that, I have the options of two
> work
> > processes - digital and analog. And my negatives will serve as my
> > archival
> > backup.
> >
> > All said, 90% of my B&W pics (100% of color) are now taken on
> digital,
> > but
> > it's the last bit that is analog that gives me memories that
> spans
> > back 50
> > years when film was there in the most impressionable years of my
> life.
> > Those were the days of Nam and protest songs, and growing up into
> > adulthood.
> >
> > Dan K.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more
> information
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
More information about the LUG
mailing list