Yes. The movie came out while I was busy with putting together the Minstrels' concert here in September 2003. My son saw the film before I did. He called me and said, "Dad, do you realize you're living a movie?!"
Very cool. I'm still taking lessons so I can begin to do that beautiful Martin justice. Below is a photo of me with the Martin, jamming with Barry during a Minstrels rehearsal in our living room last January.
Brian, I'm seriously LOL over here. I've been biting my tounge on this... but yup, that's basically how I feel. I feel that the PS mentality has taken a lot of the art out of photography, just randomly shooting shots and fixing it later in PS. Caveat, I use The Gimp for minor digital editing, in fact, I just edited one of my wedding shots that has me making an unfortunate gesture to a groomsman.
Up to a point, I agree with you. The "PS Mentality" has been taken on by what I call pseudo-photogs, people who like to have pretty pictures on the walls but really don't do jack squat to actual contribute to the art form technically. I have "art" friends who have converted to an all digital process, and while it isn't for me yet, I can completely respect their decision. It's seeing Joe Foo from off the street plopping down $4k for a prosumer body and $1k for a full digital workflow solution and now turning out "decent" stuff and calling themselves a photographer. It's horribly elitist and snobbish (just to beat anyone to the punch), but it's how I feel on this subject.
I really love developing my own black and white; it's all a part of the connection. My style is very emotional and personal; I focus on "candid" personal interactions and have adapted a photojournalistic style. I don't get the warmth and nuance from a digital workflow; I get it from working the process and bringing about a "natural" (how natural are the chems in photoprocessing? Not very, really) changes through the nuances of light.
I have to agree, the film marketplace is clearly dwindling. However, especially in the medium and large format areas (areas inhabited by elitist pricks like me), film is still the main medium. Even in the pro side, look at the inroads that Fuji continues to make on super saturated color films! Fuji continues to stand behind their product (in many ways, superior to Kodak) and I stick with it.
Like I said earlier, part of my reticence comes from the fact I have a number of pro Pentax bodies and lenses, and the Pentax digital offerings (relatively) suck. I'm not so keen on dropping the dosh to retool entirely, especially since I'm not so hot on digital to begin with.
I agree with you; assuming you are using sensors of similar field and signal processing. Canon seems to be the only company that really gets it (Kodak did for a while with their MF digital backs), but Fuji (again!) is innovating here. I expect that, hopefully, within the next five years we'll see people come back to the features (really the difference between film bodies, what was I getting BESIDES the eye?) instead of sensor games. But, this will take large inroads in color space (I mean, come on, how many do we need? We're up to 5 on pro level bodies IIRC), raw image recording, and basic sensor design. I think we'll get there, and that may be the true death knell for film.
I'm going to admit, my foray into digital process black and white was about a year ago, and I hated the results. At some point, probably when I get disgusted with the crap Pentax is turning out, I'll break down and get a Canon set up, probably to the chagrin of my wife
Great shots from Phil. He clearly has eye and uses PS and whatnot as "tools", rather than "the solution".
Cheers,
-Andrew
for what it is worth - none of my photos are photoshopped... I don't know how.
Photoshop and darkroom work, regardless of what anyone thinks (imo), are virtually the same, especially when working in RAW.
In the darkroom, you develop the film. In PS, you set conditions in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR).
In the darkroom, you create a contact sheet. In PS, you use Bridge.
In the darkroom, you set up test strips to test for exposure/aperture times on the enlarger. In PS, you use multiple files and the "undo" button.
In the darkroom, you burn/dodge to adjust exposure times in select areas of the print. In PS, you pretty much do the same. You can also take select areas using layers.
The purists swear that digital isn't "real" photography. The irony is that the painters of the 1800's swore that photography wasn't art. The plate photographers ridiculed the idea of emulsion-based films. The view camera photographers laughed at the 35mm and rangefinders. The B&W crowd scoffed at color. And now it's digital's turn.
Whatever.
The ultimate test isn't what you do with the process so much as how it ends up. Photography is about the process to only ONE person: the photographer. The viewed product, the photograph, is no longer viewed as a technical review so much as "do I like it?" and "would I put it on my wall?".
The purists bemoan all of the newbies in the field because, once upon a time, it took long hours, in both field and darkroom, and relatively little was available on the subject. The Internet changed the information delivery portion. The digital age and the significant reduction in costs did the rest.
What really puzzles me is that, finally, more and more people are becoming more technically proficient in photography and generating huge amounts of interest but some people just don't like it. I've spent more money on photographs from others over the past year (well into several thousand) that now adorn our walls than I would have ever considered in the past. Why? Because more and more of it is available and technically very well done. Plus, with my own increased knowledge in the field, I've become more critical of what really constitutes "good" photography and just a neat picture.
But the purists don't like that because suddenly, they're not quite as special.
Brian,
Next time I'm in Phoenix, the beer is on me and I think we can hash this out. If not, I'll bring the bail money
Cheers,
-Andrew
.
I've found that most pilots love sailing once they try it -- seems to stimulate the same parts of the brain.
Well, some of us weren't here back when this thread was around last time...so I guess I'll go. Music! In particular, playing piano (mainly classical...my favorite time period is the late romantics / early moderns, so mid-late 1800s through roughly 1940...up to about Copland). I play French horn too, though not as much as I'd really like to. I also love speaking French and am trying to the to the point where when I go to France, nobody suspects I'm not French. They can't tell I'm an American, so I guess that's progress
I've found that most pilots love sailing once they try it -- seems to stimulate the same parts of the brain.
May I ask what the subject matter is? Fiction? Non-fiction? EdFred's memoirs?
My hobby is collecting hobbies, at least according to a close friend. Let's see..
+ Culinary arts (beer brewing, barbecue, traditional French, Japanese, Chinese, and Italian cuisines, sausage making, wine collecting, spirits [Bourbon / Scotch])
+ Cycling (long distance road, mountain biking, dabbling in cyclocross)
+ Photography (film is art, two Pentax PZ-1P PJ bodies with plenty of glass, shoot primarially Fuji films, some Kodak Ektachrome though)
+ Mountain stuff (backpacking, hiking, camping, technical rock climbing [V1+/5.9 single pitch/5.6-5.7 multi pitch], dabbling in mountaineering and ice climbing)
+ Woodworking (traditional New England / Shaker stuff, some contemporary, working on a chaise lounge design I have now, just on paper, though)
+ Our new property in Maine (clearing, trail building, site selection... soon to be a house?)
+ Boating (wooden boats, working on plans for a modified 22' Spalding runabout utility boat; kayaking [river and ocean])
+ Fishing (recovering lobsterman, occasional sport fishing)
+ Motorcycling (former owner of a GSX-R 600, FJR1300, now bike free
+ Music (been meaning to learn to play the bass guitar)
+ Arts (dabbled in water color, done raku pottery, watched ballet, opera, "art appreciation" [I like to go to museums and stare at pretty pictures])
+ Learning (I will read anything just to learn more about it. Last 5 books - Into Thin Air [6th re-read], Dead Souls, Omnivore's Dilemma, McKinsey's Valuation, Classical Works in Sociology)
Cheers,
-Andrew
On the other hand, for me, things are pretty much the same. Still thinking that I need to find a new hobby.
Focus on the adjective "little"! I'm now down to about 6 books per year, didn't take the bike out of the garage last year, and have only done one dive in the last few years, and that was a river dive!
, Not much MTB here in Austin so that's slowed down.
