I didn't want this to get lost in the he-said-she-said digital vs film debates, because it absolutely transcends all that.
You have got to watch this video! (if that doesn't show up for you, here's an alternate host.) Then check out his website. Ian Ruther is unreal. He is what happens when you believe in something.
Interesting, Skip.
I've seen two exhibitions by a young Japanese photographer who uses the silver bromide process to make large canvas images of forest scenes in Hokkaido. There is a way to emulate the silver bromide look in Photoshop - I've got it written down in a notebook somewhere... ;-Þ
Yeah, the alternate host is the only one that worked for me, but his gallery can be reached from within there (click on his name).
The results are amazing, but if it was $500 to release the shutter, I'd sell my camera. I always felt like I was wasting money when I took throwaway shots with regular film. When he threw away that one metal plate in the video, I cringed at the waste. Digital is so liberating in that regard. I can focus on what I am trying to capture and do things like bracket and re-compose without worrying that I'm running up a big bill. I just don't print what I don't like. That guy is my hero for his ability to liquidate his personal wealth for his art without crippling worry about the spending. I'm glad some artists can do these things, and they are an inspiration to me, but I can't imagine ever following their example. I guess I'm just too cheap.
If I saw that truck out in the desert and saw those guys running around wearing respirators and rubber gloves...I'd be thinking "Rolling meth lab" and not "Cool photo stuff"
Gives a whole new meaning to "becoming part of the process"...
Without going into the debate of which is better, I believe this demonstrates the pinnacle of the analog process, as opposed to the digital.
At $500 a shot, each shot is a matter of planning and patience, to get things right. With a digital camera, we can try many variations on the theme, and pick the one we like best. Neither is wrong. In some ways they are complimentary. Analog, especially larger formats, force you to see like the camera, to get something worthwhile. If you only have 10 sheets of 4x5 film for the day, you habe to be very selective. At the same time, digital helps you to see like the camera, because you can try it over and over ril you get what you wanted. Both disciplines can help you become better with the other.
I shoot both, enjoy both. Neither is better than the other. Both have their strengths, and weaknesses.
