Re: Last minute PF gallery additions?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Now most of us shoot almost the same sensors, so there is little to discuss. Some old farts refuse to go quietly into the good night and have stuck with film. I have a lot to discuss, but nobody seems to care.

On Oct 5, 2015, at 11:27 AM, photoroy6@xxxxxxx wrote:

1) People have scattered to many places. Even the calendar for art in my local area allows one to have a free gallery of pictures online.  Perhaps we should spread the word to photo clubs etc that one can post one picture a week and perhaps get a different point of view about the pictures.
 
2)We knew much more about wet photography than we know about digital. There are only a few really tech savvy people on this list for digital stuff. (Also there are those among us like me who never learned to type efficiently)
Roy
I remember when the list first
started there was always lots of discussion about chemistry formulations
/modifications, developer/film combinations, darkroom technique, etc.
I’m not
saying there isn’t enough to discuss about digital, but it just doesn’t seem to
have that whatever (can’t find the way to say what I’m thinking about here) as
film did or still has. 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: P. David Van Verst <prolab@xxxxxxx>
To: PhotoForum educational network <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sat, Oct 3, 2015 11:51 am
Subject: Re: Last minute PF gallery additions?


> On Oct 3, 2015, at 10:17 AM, Andrew Davidhazy <andpph@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>
………..But besides feedback, general discussion or communications using this list
has also experienced a significant decline. Sometimes I think it is maybe time
to discontinue the list. Maybe there was more to discuss in the silver age than
in the digital age.

Think you’re right Andy. I remember when the list first
started there was always lots of discussion about chemistry formulations
/modifications, developer/film combinations, darkroom technique, etc.
I’m not
saying there isn’t enough to discuss about digital, but it just doesn’t seem to
have that whatever (can’t find the way to say what I’m thinking about here) as
film did or still has. I know I would rather be creating in the darkroom than
sitting in front of a monitor, at least most of the time. Just one retired old
geezer’s opinion.

Cheers,
Dave 


Art Faul

The Artist Formerly Known as Prints
------
Art for Cars: art4carz.com
Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com
Camera Works - The Washington Post

.






[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux