Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex1994
All I'm saying is that I've never had an exposure which was so off it made me go 'urgh'.
As regards developing, it is not necessary to be in control of the process from start to finish (though it definitely helps.) Black and white photos certainly suffer a lot from being developed at a lab. However, saying there's no creativity at all when a lab does your prints is a little exaggerated--after all, Cartier-Bresson famously showed no interest in anything that happened after he had rewound the film. He just reviewed contact sheets and let others do the printing. For 'straight' photography, when not trying to achieve a particular artistic effect, developing at a decent lab is just fine. Convenience wins for me: I can just drop the film in the mail or even at Asda when on other, unrelated business.
|
I did not say there is
no creativity in handing on to a lab because you obviously choose lens, frame the subject, choose speed and aperture within the confines of those available at your ISO for the film in use, any filters you decide to use and of course when to press the button
but you do preclude a whole host of other creative possibilities by using a Lab.
CB did not use a Lab but as Andy says used a team to hand print what was made available and of course he had the final say on what was released.
Duncan as you well know all Alex is doing getting wonderful exposures is shooting average tones and where they are not average relying on the exposure latitude to rescue things. Loses quality of course but is quick and easy and none demanding. As Alex says "Convenience wins for me" Never mind the quality feel the width.