alex_hawley

I agree with Clay. Both with Tri-X and HP-5, there's no real difference in developing time when exposed at 100 or 200. So, a development time at 200 will pretty well get it with exposure at 100. I suppose someone who has conducted extensive densitometry studies will scientifically refute this, but my eyes on the prints see no difference.

Donald, why not use tray development? I thought it was going to be cantankerous when I started LF but I've found nothing can be simpler. Additionally, the investment in gadgetry is a low as can be. After doing tray development for several months, I have a hard time understanding why anyone wants to fool around with tanks, hangers, tubes, ect.

Maybe no insight but a comment or two. First, some quotes from the last two responses:

 

"From what I have seen of most critiques, they are not only not helpful; they are harmful." and "The blind leading the blind is a perilous thing."

"It seems like those who have taken more than one workshop with a "master" feel they continue to benefit even more in subsequent workshops."

 

In the last year, I've had the benefit of three legitimate masters commenting on my work. Now, I've been photographing for a little over three years now so I consider myself somewhat "blind" in the artistic arena. The only consistent source of feedback I have available is participating in a couple of these internet sites. The great awakening I got from the three masters is that their perception of my what was good in my work was diametrically opposed to what the "critics" on these websites consider good. As Michael says, very few are really qualified to be critics and doing so bears a great responsibility. If one listens to the vox pop masses, then one will produce work that is basically maudlin, run of the mill, buy it in the novelty store. Nothing wrong with making a living doing that, but its not for me, and I don't want to do that kind of stuff.

 

So, to sum up, as one who is relatively blind, I certainly agree that the blind leading the blind is not the path to follow. Time spent with an acknowledged master is truly time well spent.

Love this type of thread. This type of discussion is where learning really takes place.

 

This link was posted on the Site Feedback forum the other day. Its an analysis of behaviors observed in judging photographs at various camera clubs over a period of a couple years.

 

http://freespace.virgin.net/eddy.sethna/thoughts_on_judging.htm

 

Although the article deals with judging camera club competitions, I think the basic behaviors can be generically applied to critics. Just substitute "critic" for "judge". There are those (probably the majority) who apply their own personnal bias to the criticism and those that truly try to stay objective and have the credentials of success and achievement to back it up. Anyway, I thought it was a worthwhile read and applicable to this discussion.

I'll put in a word for "High Plains Farm" which is Paula's work. It sent me straight back to childhood and adolescence which was spent in a very similar setting. Everything was all so familiar. Really rang my bell. On top of that, studying it from a photographic aspect has been time very well spent. The best lesson I've learned is to photograph what I have feeling for, and yes, that "Flyover Country" can be beautiful.

Thanks Patrick. Perhaps this change somehow took place when I became a subscriber. That's the only concious change in my account that I'm aware of.

I'm looking at the place you're talking about Brian. I thought it used to be there. Maybe I can't see it being logged in myself, but this is the thread that brought it to my attention: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005mLB

When it comes time for critical focus, you find the loupe is back home in the darkroom, not in the camera bag.

Re-reading your post again Bill, post-war film availability may certainly have been a problem. After the war ended and the large production contracts terminated, companies typically found themselves with too much capacity and too much surplus government-contract stuff. So typically, they had to suck it in tight for a while until things got back to normal.

 

Supposedly there's an island in the South Pacific where the Army buried 3000-some Graphic cameras. Legend says the Folmer Graphic company made a deal with the Gov. to keep the cameras off the surplus market, thus not having their post-war market undercut. Maybe Kodak got their surplus film thrown into the same pit.

I don't think there was any severe shortage of film during that time. There seems to plenty of family snapshots from that era, maybe more than from previous times. Certainly military needs had priority but with the huge increase in film production necessary to meet those needs, the civilian market probably wasn't too affected. Personal travel was curtailed from gasoline and tire rationing. Also, the speed limits were reduced to save gasoline. Commercial photographers in areas where there were large military installations typically made a lot of money during that period.

 

I know Gowland, Adams, and Gordon Parks had government contracts during the war. Weston doesn't appear to have done any of that work that I can recall, but I'm not the expert here.

Just found out through a forum that my e-mail address is not

visible. Checked this out myself and its true. However, according

to the personal info I have entered through the My Workspace page,

it should be there. Tried the Update routine and it still doesn't

show. Is it me or a glitch?

Didn't really know anything about Peter Gowland until a couple years ago when I got serious about photography. Turns out, he's the guy who did all those great Rigid Tool calenders that adorned the shop all these years. Hey, this is the guy who wrote the book on modern glamor (aka Babe) photography, not to mention making some fairly innovative cameras.

WOW Jarrod, I'm astounded, and thank you for the offer. I'll e-mail you. As for my e-mail address not being visible here, I apoligize. I thought it was. I'll have to look into this.

 

Thanks again Jarrod,

Alex

Mike, you've gotten a lot of well-rounded advice, probably more than you can get from any other source. Let me just back up and say that photography has allowed me to balance out the doldrums of the daily engineering job by allowing me to something purely creative.

 

When I first went to engineering school, I had dreams of building things that were creative and innovative. Somewhere along the way, that got a bit sidetracked. Although I got accepted into a very prestigeous and elite program, and occasionally made some minor innovative contributions to it, after ten years, I was pretty well burned out. This was truly Super High Itensity Stuff. I was gone a LOT. Sometimes for months. The last two years, I was home only about 90 days total.

 

When I left that job, I had the chance to take over the family business. But with four kids in grade school, and very uncertain prospects of the business' future, I passed it by. My parents fully understood and were not dissapointed in my decision. Went to work for someone else and several years of running more Super High Instensity Stuff, always on the edge of going on my own as a consultant, always talking with those that had been there and done it. Nearly all I met who had had their own companies, some very successful and prestigeous, had run into the same thing I had; burnout, physical problems from the stress, divorces, ect.

 

I found I was much more interested in being with my family as they grew up and faced their problems than I was chasing the almighty buck and stoking my own ego. So, I throttled back and eased myself out of the Super High Intensity Stuff.

 

Still had that creative need apart form the job though. That's when photography came to the rescue. I operate my interest on shoe string, my equipment is old, some of it older than me (and I just turned 50), and I have to fight for the time to pursue it. I started out with a 35mm and grocery store processing. But I've developed a passion for it, work in Large Format from loading the film to mounting the print all myself, and passionatly want to produce work that rings a bell with someone, primarily me. If others like it, all the better, but not primarily necessary. I plod along at the day job which does get interesting at times because now I'm the guy that gets called in to figure things out when they go wrong. That way, I keep the bills paid and once in a while, bail one of the kids out when they incur unforseen events.

 

I'll never know if I could have succeeded at the family business. Doesn't bother me anymore. I don't give a flip about the engineering career any more. I still managed to accomplish many of the goals I had there although I never patented the super whammadyne thing-a-ma-bob nor built the mighty railroad through the jungle. But trying to photograph something at a level of artistry that's somewhere above a snapshot just intrigues the hell out of me and is just as challenging, in fact more so, than figuring out what caused the Great Blackout. That's what keeps me going.

 

One can succeed at professional photography and you've gotten advice here from some of the best who have. My advice is to make the jump now when you're young or forever hold your piece. For me, putting the job and the passion into their respective places has worked.

My sympathies Mike. After 25 years, with an advanced engineering degree and background, my job pays the bills, doesn't leave hardly any discretionary money to spend, and the pay is still not commensurate with what I do. All of the kids are now out of the house but two of them are still in college.

 

Its a very hard choice to make about working for yourself especially with a child on the way. There is no good way to do it unless one has a very substantial nest egg tucked away to fall back when times get rough. And they will get extremely rough early on working for yourself. No matter what field you go into, succeeding at your own business is 99% self-promotion and only 1% talent/skill. And you are tied to it 100% of the time. There is no vacation unless everything is going extremely well for a few days.

 

Good luck in making your decision!

This SUCKS. Seems like when I grow fond of something, the bloody SUITS discontinue it.

As far as I know, its about the most permanent marker on the commercial market. I've seen stuff written with a sharpie still pretty legible after being out in the elements for several years. It can rub off from abrasion, but its not going to fade unless its out in the sun for several years.

Eastern Kansas, about 60 miles South of Topeka. Would rather be in Western Kansas where I grew up, but what th' 'ell, one has to work. Besides, with no rain for 7 weeks, this area is starting to look like the West.

Alex - (I feel like I'm writing to myself). Get yourself an issue of B&W and Lenswork magazines. Althought they are dedicated to B&W work, they showcase what is being collected and bought by serious photography patrons. That sort of work is not what you see on any of these websites. I went through a period such as you are going through a couple years ago. Thought I'd sell some stuff to my State's tourism magazine and travel office. They only took color so got myself some Velvia and hit the trail. Sent some stuff to the editor. Well, she died about 3 weeks after the submittal date and a new editor had to be found and pick up the ball. Several months later, my slides were returned, none being accepted. After I got them back, I realized most of them really sucked anyway. Looking through many issues of the magazine during this time, I came to realize it was dominated by three highly commercial professionals and it was going to take a LOT of work to break in.

 

I hated Velvia slides anyway. Now I'm working on getting a couple B&W prints into the local gallery, one's I've gotten good reviews on outside of p-Net. Much more realistic place to start. Much better way to work into the regional networks that can lead to better museums/galleries in the region. Do as Michael suggests - study hard. Best of luck!

Springs can weaken over time if they are kept under tension. The weakening is slow, maybe taking a few years, so one usually doesn't notice it until its too late. That is the reason why shutters are best kept uncocked.

Ann, fifteen minutes for Tri_x in HC110B?? That must be about N+5!! My N+1 time is 7 minutes with an EI of 160. I've pushed roll film that far using Xtol but I think you might be going too far with 110B and not really getting as far as you want. I could be wrong, but that just intuitively seems like beyond the point of 110B's capability.

So far, I've used the finger nail technique getting a hook under one of the film notches. Works, and I keep my nails short. Using the darkslide or a strip of film? Good suggestions and probably more reliable than my short nails.

Water! At least a 1 liter bottle of water.

Also, several of the veteran contributors are highly accomplished professionals, with there own websites, and have no need of the pnet ratings stroke game.

 

I have to agree with Gene, scans just do not do justice to a print. I'm always on the verge of deleting all my uploads for that reason.

Vicki, I agree with John. Note that you are also missing the riser column. By the time you scrounge up or fabricate everything needed to make this work, you'll have way too much time/money spent. pick up a good, complete Omega DII or a Besler. They really can't be beat and are still highly treasured many years after production was discontinued.