> but really, there used to be awe experienced when folks looked at a picture > created using multiple exposures with multiple enlargers when they knew what > they were looking at, and it was an appreciation not just of the image but > of the effort that went into it - the assumption now is that any twit can do > it in PS. .. and subsequently the efforts of the darkroom practitioner who > undertakes such a feat is diminished, they are written off as a twit who > obviously didn't realise how easy it would have been done with a PC or a Mac Karl Indeed: I understand that for sure. I remember the last (I expect it will be the last) presentation at the club from someone who specialised in multiple exposure prints. The perception now really is that it is easy. Actually, it really really is easy to do this stuff in PS to a standard that satisfies commoners (people who have not learned to be anal about photographs). Normal people don't spot that the shadows are the wrong way [heheheh, WR's dropped moon in this week's gallery]. The don't seem to mind the obviously "cut-out" edges of the computer montage. The spotty brat's 5-minute wonder is just as good as any skilled practitioner's masterpiece. How can we impress people with the mountains we've climbed when technology keeps flattening them? Bob
