Who still uses a "Darkroom" instead of Adobe Lightroom

misterb

I noticed some enlargers on e-bay, and wondered how many photographers *still* process thier own B&W film and print?

I did some processing/printing while in the Army (1979-81) as part of the Morale Support Fund- which had a really nice Darkroom set up. About 5 years later I took a class in college, too.

The retailers still sell chemicals, so somebody must still do it!

ziggy53

I moved this to the "Finishing School", which I think is the best fit.

Carry on.

misterb

ziggy53 wrote: »

I moved this to the "Finishing School", which I think is the best fit.

Carry on.

No problem- wasn't sure where to post, and I sure won't ask for another forum.

misterb

Here's what others said on "another board" which has more activity:

http://forum.fourthirdsphoto.com/showthread.php?p=520715#post520715

Art Scott

I sold my Chromega 4x5 enlarger over 15 yrs ago...because.....I had no time to do darkroom work and the chemicals would go bad on me....
I found that getting a member ship to the local darkroom rental place was much more affordable for me.....but then the company that owned the rental darkrooms
was also my processing company......so I just let them do it all and that actually saved me more money.......

Sorry I could not be of help.......I do however have a Kreonite 4' fiberglass sink that have never had the drain hole drilled and it has never been installed.....thinking of making
a game cleaning station out of it.........maybe..............and I have a few porcelain developing trays also..........

pathfinder

Like Art, I closed my darkroom over 20 years ago, and have never looked back.

I know there are those who wax poetical about the darkroom, but the digital darkroom lets me do things I could only dream of back then, faster, easier, cheaper, vastly better, and more fun.

I still own a dichroic enlarging head - make me a good offer and you can own it.

EXILER

currently im taking a photoclass at the local college and we are using film and making our own prints in the dark room.. and ill say that ive never being a in a darkroom before, and its definately a challenge. But it is a good change of pace from the digital world. But the teachers there are saying they arent sure how many more semesters the film based classes are going to be available. slowly but surely they will fade away.

daylightimages

I had the opportunity to hear David Plowden speak at a conference recently. He, too, has stopped working in a traditional darkroom (other than developing film). It was pretty cool to hear someone David's age getting re-energized into shooting black & white because of the better opportunities a digital darkroom has given him to process his prints.

His only complaint is that it's difficult to get galleries to treat inkjet prints the same as silver prints -- the inkjet prints are perceived to be of a lower class.

Carpy

I recently completed a BTEC Photography course, and as part of it we re-visited Pinhole photography.

Back home and out of the attic came all my darkroom equipment because my appetite for all things silver had returned. I had last been in a darkroom 10 years earlier (I was doing a C&G course then which was all "wet" photography) but it felt great to be back. I ordered myself some new chemicals and paper and it is all systems go.

Many people have never experienced the magic of making things happen for themselves and like all great skills....."Once it's gone it's gone"

I am one of the people who truly believes that digital imaging will never replace film. I went to an exhibition 2 weeks ago, of Camille Silvy's work from the 1850's and it has a warmth, a clarity and feeling that is part of the photographer and his art, not something manufactured by a box of tricks

Carpy

Blackwood

I enjoy printing in a darkroom. Processing film, not so much. It's a menial task, but beats sending it to a specialist shop with B&W chemicals (most places convenient to me have to send B&W out).

pathfinder

I notice most of the comments are about B/W film. That's the easy darkroom work, Try doing color film in a home darkroom for a while.

Carpy

pathfinder wrote: »

I notice most of the comments are about B/W film. That's the easy darkroom work, Try doing color film in a home darkroom for a while.

I'm sorry, I hadn't realised that this was to be an "Elitist" debate. The "What I do is harder than what you do" attitude is a bit condescending in my opinion.

If you actually read the start of this thread, misterb asks specifically about B&W film and printing. To say that B&W is the easy darkroom work is dismissive of a lot of creativity and skill. I'm sure Ansel Adams would be pleased to hear how easy it was for him in the darkroom. If you read his book entitled "The Print" you will see there is more to it than just getting an image to appear before your eyes in the developer tray.

Actually I for one have done colour processing at home and found that as long as you take your time, and ensure that all the steps are correctly followed it didn't pose any major problems. I would not wish to detract from the skill level required to produce a satisfactory print but it certainly wasn't/isn't rocket science. All the rocket science aspect of it has already been discovered and documented.

Carpy

pathfinder

Carpy, I am sorry you took offense to my comments. My comments were meant to emphasize that B&W can be done in a dark room with much simpler tools than color - I found color printing to be quite challenging, and never came close to what I can do with Lightroom and and Epson printer. Even with Cibachrome prints.

I certainly did not mean to imply that all B&W was simple or easy, but that it is generally less technically complicated than color printing. My previous comment about dichroic filters and all that.

I think you missed the light hearted tone of my comments , which I thought were apparent, but apparently not to everyone. I see that the OP was referring to B&W printing.

Martyn

I have a B/W darkroom but it doesn't see much action anymore.

I shoot mostly digital now but do carry my film camera occasionally. I do really enjoy printing my own photos and I still find it magically the way the image appears on the paper. I find digital easier and quicker to get good results but I find it far less satisfying.

Haven't done color at home although I have done some in a community lab. Never got totally satisfactory results though.

Art Scott

If I were to be looking to reopen my Darkroom.....I do not care how inexpensive I could get a condenser enlarger,
I would get the largest most stable dichroic enlarger I could afford........I hated having to mess with the flimsy
gel filters for the condenser enlarger.......

Bob in GV

If you have questions or want to participate in a film forum, try this

http://www.apug.org/forums/home.php

Blackwood

pathfinder wrote: »

I notice most of the comments are about B/W film. That's the easy darkroom work, Try doing color film in a home darkroom for a while.

Never learned, but I've been in the darkroom at the community college while the color photo students were in there. Not for me. Not worth the effort.

sara505

I spent many years in the darkroom - loved it, wouldn't trade that experience for anything. I went into digital kicking and screaming a few years back, now, having gained a degree of proficiency - but always learning, learning, learning - realize that digital photography has no limits, the creative possibilities are truly endless. Besides, breathing all those chemicals probably didn't do my body or brain any favors.

But I do think that film cameras and darkrooms are the best education one can get, a very solid foundation.

The young people are now clamoring for film cameras and darkroom equipment; back to basics, a purist revival.

I sold all my gear years ago - everything - for $100, thinking it was value-less. Ha ha. My only regret is, my grandchildren will probably be yelling at me for getting rid of it.

Anyway, I'm glad to be out of that dark smelly place and into the light, but have very fond memories of the darkroom and consider those days to have been an invaluable learning experience.

pathfinder

Daguerreotypes are gorgeous images, that have no corresponding equivalents in fim, or digital. I am not willing to breathe mercury vapors for them, myself, but I truly do think they are gorgeous, timeless images.

I had a thread a while ago about trying to create a similar look digitally with a copper tinted metallic paper.

I know that gallerys, and some consumers, feel silver print are a higher quality than even good fine art archival prints. I am not sure that I agree, however.

My own B&W large prints ( 16x20), from 35mm film - Tri-X or Plus-X - do not look very good in comparison to my digital monochrome images printed on my Epson 3800.
I am sure larger format film B&W gave better results than my 35 mm

sara505

pathfinder wrote: »

...I know that gallerys, and some consumers, feel silver print are a higher quality than even good fine art archival prints. I am not sure that I agree, however....

I think that has to do with the fact that with digital, conceivably, with a click of the mouse - or thousands of clicks - you are able to flood the market, and your walls and your mailbox and your stationery, business cards, etc. etc. with a gazillion copies. The silver print is another story. They are much more labor and time-intensive to produce, and the number of prints available is much more limited, and that's one of the things that determines the value of art - how many copies are floating around out there.

misterb

Well.. went and got a Beseler 23c II by my wifes job for $60 bucks.

Let the games begin!