Launching of Monalog™ Collective

A group of black and white analog photographers has just launched a new photographic collective dedicated to supporting black and white film photography and traditional printing processes. They have chosen to call it Monalog™, a new word derived from “monochrome” and “analog” because they don’t make color prints or incorporate anything digital in what they do … no scanning of negatives, no creation of “negatives” from digital files, and no digital printing of film negatives.

 

Monalog’s founders make silver gelatin enlargements, contact prints on Lodima and Azo paper, platimum and albumen prints and prints using carbon transfer processes. They use 35mm and medium format rangefinders, medium format SLRs, and a range of wooden view cameras that produce images using 4x5, 8x10, 11x14, 8x20 or 14x17 inch negatives. While they use different tools, films, chemistry and papers to create their art, all share a love and unabiding commitment to black and white film and traditional printing processes.

 

Monalog’s goal is to grow through membership of fellow “monalog” photographers that are dedicated to this wonderful medium and exhibit a high caliber of vision and adherence to their craft. The collective will also engage with others, individually and through collaborative activity, and support the industry that makes all this possible.

 

So please check out the Monalog Collective at www.monalogcollective.com. There you will find member galleries and information, an entertaining and informative blog and updates on news and events.

 

Monalog welcomes a limited number of other like-minded photographers that wish to join the collective. For more information, please contact info@monalogcollective.com.

We chose this because we don’t make color prints or incorporate anything digital in what we do

Well, didn’t they digitize the photos to get them onto the website you linked to?

How can someone who is sincerely serious about FILM, call it "analog" (analogue would be only slightly better)o_O

Well, didn’t they digitize the photos to get them onto the website you linked to?

Yes, I thought the same thing. When I went to their web site I was wondering if I'd see any results and to my (pleasant) surprise I did. Although I still occasionally shoot film, both color and BW, I can't join since I go digital after the film is processed. Oh and I rely on a commercial lab for the processing.

 

In any case, I admire their purity and adherence to principle and I wish them success.

Yes, I thought the same thing. When I went to their web site I was wondering if I'd see any results and to my (pleasant) surprise I did. Although I still occasionally shoot film, both color and BW, I can't join since I go digital after the film is processed. Oh and I rely on a commercial lab for the processing.

 

In any case, I admire their purity and adherence to principle and I wish them success.

I just didn’t understand a mission statement saying that nothing digital is used when a digital process is used to display the kind of film photography I thought they were talking about. I honestly expected their work would have to be seen in person, not on a monitor. It was a little surprising. I, too, admire such dedication and some of the photos appealed to me.

 

Reading their auto bios / artist statements was a little disappointing. They go into great technical detail but give short shrift to any meaningful photographic / aesthetic vision beyond cookie cutter platitudes.

It's the sort of thing I should like, but I detest the use of the word analog in reference to photography. Everything else is OK, though my 4x5s have always been made out of metal, not wood. They should probably learn to scan, as their banner photo quality is terrible. Still, I wish them success and I hope to do some wet-process stuff when I retire and have time.

What is the issue with using ‘analogue’ or today’s dictionary-accepted ‘analog’ in a description of film photography?

 

Here’s Oxford:

Relating to or using signals or information represented by a continuously variable physical quantity such as spatial position, voltage, etc. (‘analogue signals’)

Often contrasted with digital (‘the information on a gramophone record is analogue’)

1. (of a clock or watch) showing the time by means of hands or a pointer rather than displayed digits.

 

2. Not involving or relating to the use of computer technology, as a contrast to a digital counterpart.

Ironic, or at least amusing, that verbal purity would come up in a thread about so-called photographic purity.

 

Me, I’m lucky and, like the old commercial says, I’m only 99 and 44/100 percent* pure!

 

*Were I Non-American, I might dare to type ‘per cent’

How can someone who is sincerely serious about FILM, call it "analog" (analogue would be only slightly better)o_O

[ATTACH=full]1332967[/ATTACH]

The portrait of the artiste as a young man with his Marine Combat Graphic in 1962 .~

Some of us have and have had a truly intense relation with FILM

Looks like a cowboy who stumbled upon something he can’t figger out....

 

;)

Edited March 14, 2020 by Moving On

I don't see the need for it. There's already APUG which has been rebranded as Photrio and can still be set up for 100% film, digital, hybrid or all 3. So if you just use film no problem. I still shoot 6x7cm B&W film 90% of the time. I also do all of my own processing and printing. I also scan negatives from time to time and use a DSLR for color. I use the hybrid section. Between Photo.net and Photrio and all the FB Pages do we really need another offering?

Here is a magazine out of Germany devoted exclusively to analog (yes that means film) photography:

Magazine | Silvergrain Classics

Hmmm, very interesting. I like them. Although they seem to serve primarily themselves and their mission, their intentions are good (in my estimation) and the end result is they are furthering the "analog" process, even if they post representations of their work in a digital website format/setting. It's awesome, IMO. I see one of their photographers is located not too far from me! I get up his way, I might try to go see him.