Your darkroom philosophy

[wontonny]

What is your philosophy behind why you still make darkroom hand prints in this digital day and age? I'm not condoning it, I'm a student in high school and when I talk to adults about how I shoot almost 90% film because I strongly dislike digital, they are very surprised. What are your reasons? Even the most minute reasons.

[Bryce]

There are a handful of reasons, but the biggest one is image quality. As of 3 years ago, I took some classes at the local University and played with the best... there was nothing then to compete with wet materials and medium format B+W film. At any price, let alone within my means.
Next is equipment. Modern cameras give me fits!
Then there is some natural attraction I have for obsolete technology...
I also like the process, though it is so time consuming that I know I could be more productive.
I could switch over someday, but more progress will have to be made in printing and scanning technology, and the price will have to drop.
Since many of my images require long time exposures, film is necessary still.

[Simon Larbalestier]

I wrote this in another darkroom post:

"For me printing is the root of the process and it helps keep me grounded in what i do. I seem to spend a lot of time in Bangkok scanning, captioning and cloning out dust on neg scans. Back in the UK i can concentrate on making prints and seeing results that for me have a much greater longevity. It is however a very long and expensive process that requires a great of deal of patience on my part. Fortunately i keep detailed notes to short cut some of the leg work but as papers and emulsions change i'm constantly adjusting and rewriting my print notes. I also find it helps to concentrate my thoughts about my work unlike my time spent on my computer....which gives me a head and neck ache...."

Having thought about it a bit more:

Printing in the darkroom helps me to understand and relate to the lens used to make the image in the most direct way i can think of - and also the way i processed the negative - therefore i find it a valuable way of honing and constantly adjusting my photographic "vision" (for want of a better word) before, during and after i've taken the shot. I do not get this from seeing my images on the computer screen during scanning or during any post production work (dust removal, curve adjustments) in Photoshop.

[350D_user]

Simple... digital cameras/printers cannot produce good b+w photos.

[BJ Bignell]

I enjoy the process of photography, and hand-printing b&w photos is an important step in the process. And to be honest, the magic of the image appearing in the development tray thrills me every time.

[FrankS]

In addition to what has already been stated: I am more serious about my photography than the average consumer snapshooter (as all of us here are). I like the fact that there is a different and more convenient process for them (digital) to do their thing to satisfy their needs and make them happy. Using film and printing in my darkroom is my way of honouring/expressing my dedication to the traditional photographic process and a way of differentiating myself from the masses; not only with results but also in process. I like the idea of being known as an old fashioned, traditional photographer. I like the idea of carrying on a tradition and preserving knowledge.

[sepiareverb]

Well, as I sit here in front of this screen to do so many things these days- both for work and pleasure- I find that the time in the darkroom is as much about the process and the quality as it is about the sensation. The water, the fans, the safelights- this is different, in for me, a very pleasurable way. I'm also up and moving around- a real plus in these sedentary times.

I find that the quality of traditional silver materials is actually gotten at a cost savings at the scale/volume I work. Printing 11x14 or 16x20 ink jet prints would certainly bankrupt me- the last time I went for ink cartridges for my desktop printer they were $50 each- and never seem to last very long. I no longer even have a printer for this reason.

I can use equipment of any age and get quality results. This adds a whole measure of fun to my work. The 100 year old lens or camera still works, and can produce an authentic image without any Photoshop filters or fiddling.

I also very much like that silver prints are unique. That you can't just press the button and spit out 100 of them.

Digital certainly has it's place. Commercial work is streamlined, the final product rarely seems to need the quality traditional materials can provide, and our need to 'have it now' is placated. I do mourn the people of the future who will likely have no visual record of this time- I still can't really believe that the millions of digital snapshots will ever be archived in any form. One of my fondest memories is going through the big envelope of photos at my grandparents kitchen table- hearing the stories, finding that one picture of Uncle so and so and his enormous moustache. Prints that were made 100 years, 50 years before still there in physical form, handled and seen. Something we should all have the chance to do.

[FrankS]

Digital certainly has it's place. Commercial work is streamlined, the final product rarely seems to need the quality traditional materials can provide, and our need to 'have it now' is placated. I do mourn the people of the future who will likely have no visual record of this time- I still can't really believe that the millions of digital snapshots will ever be archived in any form. One of my fondest memories is going through the big envelope of photos at my grandparents kitchen table- hearing the stories, finding that one picture of Uncle so and so and his enormous moustache. Prints that were made 100 years, 50 years before still there in physical form, handled and seen. Something we should all have the chance to do.


Yes!

[.JL.]

In addition to what has already been stated: I am more serious about my photography than the average consumer snapshooter. I like the fact that there is a different and more convenient process for them (digital) to do their thing to satisfy their needs and make them happy. Using film and printing in my darkroom is my way of honouring/expressing my dedication to the traditional photographic process and a way of differentiating myself from the masses; not only with results but also in process. I like the idea of being known as an old fashioned, traditional photographer. I like the idea of carrying on a tradition and preserving knowledge.

Well said, Frank.

I am adding another perspective.

Very often folks in digital photography talk about 'workflow', efficiency, cost effectiveness, productivity, etc. These are economic concepts and terminology that I deal with everyday at work (my background is indeed economics), and I don't think it fits into photography when it is regarded as an art form. Sure, some photographers might want to pursue commercial photography, where all these concepts apply and direcly affect business success or failure.

Photography for me is not a business, it is something I enjoy, especially the tradition darkroom process. If someone likes to view and even purchase my work it makes me tremendously happy, but I am not running a production line of 1,000 bestselling images out of 300,000 shots.

Some works by Bach, Mozart, Beethoven took years to finish. Not comparing myself with these genius, but their passion for musical art comes before productivity and efficiency. W. Eugene Smith is known to have spent days or weeks in the darkroom on one print, and have consequently caused so much conflict with the production side of Life Magazine publishing, and eventually led to a break up. Well, look at any Life magazine photo collection today and whose photographs appear in every single one of them?

I am not saying that all digital photographers pursue the 'production' stream. In fact, there are many digital photographers who are very dedicated in creating their images. I admire a lot of digital work. Yet for many others, when asked 'why not film?' their answers are often associated with cost effectiveness, ease and speed of production, etc, etc. Worse, there are some photographers who have not even been in a wet darkroom to experience the quality and possibilities, and are quick to reject this method solely based on economics/productivity reasons.

[FrankS]

I continue to practice traditional photographic processes instead of switching to digital photography for the same reason that folks who were painters continued to paint even after photography came along and made it so much easier to capture an image: because I like to.

[tedwhite]

I just scanned, for a client, some original C.S. Fly photographs taken in 1886 of the Apache chief Geronimo's surrender. They look as good today as the day Fly made them.

What will a digital image look like in 121 years?

[mtbbrian]

I grew up shooting film, and as far as I am concerned photography is photo-mechanical process.
I am slowly (very slowly) building a darkroom in my home, because I enjoy working in the darkroom.
I make small (8.5"x11") work prints on my computer and will continue to do so when my darkroom is completed and do larger 11"x14" and 16"x20" prints in the darkroom.
I am very much like Frank, more serious than your "average consumer snapshooter."
My photography is very artistic and making prints the "taditional way" is a hands one process that I feel is a part of the entire process.
Brian

[Finder]

Well, when I started, digital did not exist. I have simply found no reason to switch.

[NickTrop]

Making prints is an art and a craft. There is a payoff - a beautiful black and white print you will cherish for years of a special person, special time, special place. You get more out of it because you put more into it. It's entirely yours, produced with your eyes, your hands, your decisions, your skill, your time. It's a reflection of your style from film choice to developer choice, to how you dodge and burn your print - or not. It wasn't produced in any part or in any way by a computer chip, decisions weren't made by a software developer... It's 100% a product of your efforts. The tools you used assisted you, and helped you achieve your vision. They didn't create it for you.

Few things in this life have I found more rewarding than seeing an image through, from framing, to metering , to capturing, to developing, to seeing the image make it through the process, slowly emerging in a tray of Dektol in the orange glow of the darkroom. It's the thought process that's engaging and interesting. Why would I give that which I enjoy most of my creative self over to the silicone chip of a digital camera?

[erikhaugsby]

Any excuse for me to go off into a dark room filled with chemicals is an excuse enough. :D:D


But really, like Nick and others have iterated, there is an unquantifiable joy in seeing an image go from me rolling the film all the way to me drying and mounting a printed (RC/FB) image that I created completely under my own power. The uniqueness of a sliver print is non paralleled, and has a touch that the French would call je ne sais pas. I don't know what it is, either.

[Finder]

Photography is an art whether it is film or digital. One cannot said to be anymore "artistic" or difficult than the other. All photographers need to master their craft regardless of the media.

[nikon_sam]

Digital Photography or Film Photography is still Photography. I will give you that...
I often have my Color film put directly to a CD and then view the shots on my computer screen...I like it in this form mainly because the picture view is "Full Frame" (Just the way I saw it and framed it) not cropped and printed by some machine.
Now my B&W stuff I do myself...Total control of the whole process is what I want.
And having said that...Have you ever held in your hands a B&W print rich in deep black tones and creamy whites printed on Kodak Ektalure G or K or printed with Forte Elegance Warmtone FB??
This is why I still shoot film...will I ever own a digital camera...maybe...but for now I will continue with this process...shooting, developing and printing no matter how slow the whole process may seem...

[Finder]

Where can I buy Kodak Ektalure???

[nikon_sam]

Where can I buy Kodak Ektalure???

You can't...but I still have some...
There are other photo papers still being made...slim pickings!!...but I'll take what I can get...

[SDK]

Working in the darkroom can be like a Zen meditation in alchemy. It satisfies me in a way digital printing never does. I hate waiting for inkjet prints to finish spitting out, and it's much harder to get the buggers to match the color of a good RA4 print. I suppose if I got serious about color profiling it would get easier, but what fun is having machines do everything for you.

[sepiareverb]

...but what fun is having machines do everything for you.

Exactly! We sculpt with light in the darkroom. The negative is only the die for the print.

[Rob Skeoch]

The darkroom is the soul of photography.
I shoot digi every day for work. After a while you get bored with it. I'm not sure why maybe it's the photo editing.
For colour work I like digi also, but for b&w I like a real print.
I would hate to do production work again in the darkroom, but I find great satisfaction in spending four hours printing one negative and coming up with a couple great quality prints.
The digi production work I do for magazines and newspapers.... the black and white prints I sell at summer art shows as "Fine Art Black and White".
Down the road if people still want to buy my prints, I'll still make them in the darkroom. If they want to buy my digi work, I'm sure the disc will be corrupt.
-Rob

[JCT]

Lots of reasons (I'm a recent "returnee" to film)...

1. I spend all day at work in front of a computer screen -- it's nice to have a refuge from microprocessors.

2. I love the tactile nature of the work and the different parts of my brain I have to use to make a good print, my job used to entail tons of hands-on work, now I just write.

3. My late father taught me how to develop and print film (contact sheets with a bare bulb and all..) -- I still miss him and being in the darkroom reminds me of all the happy hours we spent together. Been teaching my teenager of late-- her muttered "awesome!" when her first contact sheet came up in the developer was music to my ears.

JT

[tedwhite]

JT:

That's quite touching about your father, and it reminds me of mine, but he never taught me. What he did do, when I was about eleven and complaining of not having anything to do, was this:

The next day he arrived from work with a home darkroom kit. chemicals, paper, and a glass contact printer, developing tank, and some trays. He gave me an old box Brownie that took large and long negatives, and told me to shut up about being bored, take some pictures and learn how to develop and print them.

So I did (thank God for an instruction booklet), and have been doing so ever since.

[JCT]

Your story gave me a good grin from both sides of the parenting "equation"! I have a 12-yr-old son who complains about boredom with some regularity, I actually gave him a Holga for a day of wandering around Manhattan, but couldn't get him into the darkroom to finish the deal. Maybe time for another try, he loves his Chemistry class in school... maybe it's time to pull out the Darkroom Cookbook and mix some of our own!

It's an amazing thing when you think about it, but such relatively straightforward acts by both our dads (using different approaches) ignited lifelong passions -- such a rare gift!

best,

JT

[danwilly]

I love the smell of fixer in the morning.

[Sisyphus]

Here is a link to my blog, unguided-tour.blogspot.com explaining a little bit about my philosophy. The first post is an article from the New York Times, the second post are my thoughts and sentiments.

http://unguided-tour.blogspot.com/search/label/Musings


In Brief: For me, photography is a combination of intuition and science or alchemy. It is about working with light, emotion, silver, and chemistry to manipulate the lights, the darks and the midtones. It is about decding how you want the grain on the film to look, large or small, sharp grain or fine grain, and resolution.

With Digital photography, regardless of what cameras you buy, the image texture looks the same, and i feel the photographer no longer leaves their signature on their prints by how they printed, it has become all homoginized because every is using the same tools.

Granted a lot of photographers may use leicas, however, they all have their own special way of processing their film, weather they're using rodinal at 1:25 or 1:50, whether they are processing their film at 68 degress, or for less time at 75 degrees. Whether they are using D-76, Hc 110, Pyro, or technidol, or microdol. Agitation also effects grain, density and contrast--whether they agitate the film slowly or quickly.

When it comes to printing their are million possibilities to interpret a print, with all kinds of developers, additives, and toners. Whether or not you want contrasty images, or continous tones with more seperation of the carious hues of greys. The possibilities are endless, as well as putting the final touches on the print with toners, sepia, selenium--even different dilutions of selenium and different times will effect tonality--blue toner, copper toners, gold toners, and myriad of combinations.

With digital, you are just working in grayscale and printing ink on paper, not actually manipulating or working with the embedded sliver to interpret tonal range of your negatives.

It also gives me a chance to disconnect myself from the world, news, internet, wife, children, parents, pets, telephone calls, I go inside lock the door, and everyone knows to leave me alone, unless the house is burning down, then it is mad dash to first save the vintage prints, the negatives, the books, the cameras, then the kid, then the pets, and then the wife--ok just kidding, but you should get the idea!

What is also fun, taking one image, and printing it 1000 different ways, with different developers, different papers, different temperatures, and toned in toners and different combinations, you begin to see all the charm that is being lost.

[canonetc]

What is your philosophy behind why you still make darkroom hand prints in this digital day and age? I'm not condoning it, I'm a student in high school and when I talk to adults about how I shoot almost 90% film because I strongly dislike digital, they are very surprised. What are your reasons? Even the most minute reasons.

There is a great satisfaction in making a work of art with my own hands. In the darkroom, there is no question if I get the print right, or get it wrong. There is no intermediary machine making decisions for me.

I prefer the durability and beauty of silver as opposed to digital inks.

I also enjoy giving the digital industry The Finger. I do not wish to depend on them on order to be "a photographer". I hope that many more students will use digital only as needed. "I use digital to make money, I use film to make art."

Darkroom printing contains the basic human enjoyment of wonder; of watching something happen that we do not understand, and which borders on the miraculous.

Cheers,

Chris
canonetc

[tedwhite]

Chris:

"...the basic human enjoyment of wonder; of watching something happen that we do not understand, and which borders on the miraculous."

Well said, sir. I've been doing it for decades, and every day in the darkroom, printing, little miracles still occur, and that's what draws me in.