“I’ve hit a wall with digital and I’ve gone back to view camera… looking forward to trying the new Ektar when it is released…”
– Don, Vermont photographer and comrad on Figital Revolution
It’s moments like these that give me a warm fuzzy feeling and hope for film / hybrid based photography.
2 thoughts on “Quote of the Day”
A little rant on Imacon the scanners.
I found that it is actually cheaper to do traditional dark room printing. I say this because just to rent an Imacon is $50 – 60 per hour and to buy one is a $13,000 investment. Because of the expense, it is hard for me to justify spending that kind of money on technology when I can use traditional darkroom technique for much less. At Print Space in Manhattan, it only costs $20 per hour to reserve your own personal black & white darkroom; for color, it is $14.50 per hour.
The cost of renting an Imacon is a bit much for my taste compared to the darkroom. I wish places would be a little cheaper so it would allow people like me to be able to experiment with that type of technology. I think lowering the price would also encourage people to use film and experiment more with scanners.
With that said, I have been working with a flatbed scanner (Epson 4499) so that I can experiment and learn about scanning negatives. The problems that I have with the scanner are how time consuming it is and that, after a while, the additive colors that come from the screen really start to bother my eyes.
I am interested in the fact that, with a hybrid workflow, one can print on many papers. It’s something that I am thinking about for the future.
In the hybrid workflow, photography starts leaning towards a more contemporary form of Printmaking.
I enjoy Patty Smith’s instant photography that she did with her Land Camera. I think there is a lesson to be learned with her work.
I like that there is no big workflow or fancy equipment and she is still able to create an image that is poetic. Her tonality doesn’t have a huge dynamic range, but is soft and simple, just like her subject matter. It is the simplification of her work that shows a keen sensibility to the medium.
It frustrates me how complicated and expensive photography can be. I feel equipment doesn’t have to be expensive or complicated to be able to do good photographic work. I wish that high-end scanner were a little bit more accessible to people who don’t have a lot of cash flow. I feel that Imocon scanners shouldn’t be that expensive to rent.
Thanks for reading,
Scott- I agree with much your “rant” but the issue is not only the cost of digital but what is reasonable for the average photographer to do. I agree that the Imacon is expensive and it is something the average photographer is not going to have and in most cases when someone rents a unit they are not fully aware of how to run it to its max so the value of the rental is compromised…. there is alot more to scanning then just pressing scan….
Simple is always best in my book with regards to workflow.
Most photographers have been sold that they can do everything now with current technology and there is no need for master printer or labs… this is wrong on two fronts: 1. far to expensive as your rant points outs and 2. not everyone is a master printer or is going to understand the complexities of color tone and ink.
A better approach in my book is do what you can and send out what you can’t… in most cases this is only 10-15% of most of my clients works. In many cases they will do work scans on scanners like you mentioned and work prints in PS… they come to services like ours when they need the better scan and better tonality and want a master printer to look at and work with their images… this was very true in analog photo and should be true in digital and hybrid technologies…