Maybe I didn't express it clearly,
1. I refer "knowledge of exposure" as the ability to know lighting condition
and able to compensate before you click the shutter.
Not when you post-process.
2. AEB is not a panacea. But NK photogs will use it more than the OS.
Or rather OS will brag that they need only one click rather than multiple
clicks by NK.
3. The start of this thread is to compare OS with NK. As such, mentioning
digital post processing is in itself, blasphemous to OS.
Btw, how can one know the results in stage II?
When one decides to push or pull process in development, one is only
taking a calculated guess/ risk that the whole roll turns fine.
Printing, again, lotsa trial and error.
(I believe) Even Ansel Adams has done a lot of **** work before he has
a satisfied moon and half dome...... :sweat:
Anyway, errrrr, justarius, I don't agree that scanning negative is similar
to processing or printing. It is another archiving process.
There is no change in content, it is only a change in the storage medium.
What the user can do is dust removal, and possibly an ability to
post-process in photoshop at a later stage. :nono:
But again, that deviates from the purity of OS philosophy, doesn't it?
(ok, i know that OS darkroom work is not really that pure in that with
montage, dodge n burn..., the content can be distorted, i.e. there is
a loss in content integrity. But well, digital just makes it so much easier....)
Frankly, when we mention processing and printing, I have some reservations:
1) are you using colour or B&W film (I would say 95% will agree B&W)
2) how do you dispose your chemicals, in a socially responsible way?
3) do you build a darkroom in your own house or use from cc, or photo club?
4) Do you think 80% of the passionate NK photogs are able to either
build a darkroom or lease one and afford enough time for such tinkering.
5) Self-devt and printing is not cheaper.
Printing is fun, I have no doubt abt it , but devt, not really so.... :cry:
One really needs passion to do such OS work lor.
I don't know, call me ignorant or a pessimist. When we are using cassette
tape, DAT or record, audiophiles would pride themselves in locating the
track they wanted in a tried and tested way. With CD, it is a press of
button. Yes, we can still argue that record has the warmth that CD (or SACD
for the purist to debate) will never reach. But one scan at Harvey
Norman, Best Denki, blah, blah, blah, I would say 80% (critical mass,
overwhelming majority) will prefer a fwd button to advance a track than
locating it with a needle.
Btw, I am not advocating AEB, or purveyor of total ignorance in exposure,
I am starting an honest extrapolation that, maybe, with a faster product
obsolescence and the quicker pace a society marches on,
the good old days of learning perfect exposure by
shoot/develop/print one hundred rolls of Tri-X/FM2/Xtol/RC is less plausible
(errrrr, and proceed to shoot/dev/print another hundred rolls of
Tri-X/FM2/Xtol/FB) :devil:
Will you do it? ;p
PS1: maybe I should have set it clear in the first place that
mastering exposure is akin to using the zone system in the field.
PS2: correction on Ansel's triglogy. It should be
"The camera", "The negative", "The print".