Well I am certainly not a computer buff. I got into computers at work. Took the first one home for the weekend to try and learn something of how one program worked and returned on the Monday in the same state of ignorance. It all appeared totally baffling. Once I understood how to do things and I was getting out of the machine what I wanted then confidence grew. Within a couple of years I was wizzing around Excel and doing all manner of fancy stuff.
When I got into digital photography I was shooting jpeg and using Paint Shop Pro 7. Initially a huge struggle. I tend to crash and bash around and not read the various books. That program took me quite a while to get to where I was happy. In the sales I saw PSP 8 rated as a significant advance on PSP 7 so I got it. Lots of changes so nearly back to square 1. In the end I used features in both as the easier route.
Then WPF started up. Initially, and there is a long thread on it, I carried on as before in the zone I was comfortable with and used jpeg and PSP7 & 8. Then along came Foxy and I was dragged into RAW and yet another program to try to get to grips with, Nikon Capture 4. Initially that did my head in until I was getting better results than previously. Next was a camera upgrade that required more processing power so I got a new PC. Having spent years with and so comfortable with Windows 2000 the new machine had XP as the operating system. So another learning curve.
Next up was NX and CS2. ............... brain drain. NX I found very easy so it was a quick win. CS2 is a different story, and is still a bit of a brain drain.
To relate all that back to Matts original post [ " Photography (as I see it) has changed from the art of film and chemistry to computer files/downloads and photoshop...nothing really wrong with that as there are some incredible images being produced by these new technologies. " ] and Adeys comment [ " Black and White was more or less the order of the day as, without a proper set-up, colour-printing is far more difficult and not much fun (developing your first slide film is exciting when you first take the film out of the reel, though!). "]
B&W was easy and satisfying as it was easy wins. A good few prints could be made in a session.
Colour negative drove me mad, as each time I went to print the enlager filter pack had to be resorted. Sometimes I could only get one good print in an evening so quickly gave up on that and moved to Cibachrome as the paper was more stable. Never the less, mixing up the chemicals, and working in near pitch black, processing prints in a bit of old drainpipe rolled on the bench. While satisfying next day when the prints had dried, was in reality all a bit of a pain in the butt. A whole evening might yield half a dozen prints. 50 the same could take nearly all night.
So my experience is it come down to wins.
In the old days I prefered B&W printing as wins were easier to achieve, and each win inspired going for another.
Computers and photo programs may take time to learn, well those bits of the program that will satisfy your need, but if you take some of the romance out of the old days make for a preferable processing experience. Therefore once mastered provide quick wins.
Quite a number of professionals have returned to film, and have it processed and printed for them as they could not keep pace with the everchanging Digital Darkroom so anyone struggling is not alone.
As I type this I see Derekb's new post and chuckle to myself as often I spend 1/2 an hour or more on an image ( small change by comparison with the old days ). Sorting out my last but one gallery job to satisfy my mentor took over an hour, and I think I know what I am doing in a flash environment. So nothing to do with exposure correction issues.
Perhaps thats because I hop the image around various programs using those bits I understand.
Don
|