Discussion in 'Photography' started by woodyloveslinkin, Nov 7, 2010.
Do we have any dark room photographers here?
I haven't tried it myself, though I'm dying to learn. D: I'm taking an actual photography class for my degree, so hopefully I'll be able to try it out in the near future. :]
Edit: Also, moved to the Photography forum, seemed more fitting. ^__^
Ok old topic but I still gotta say it... *raises hand and jumps up and down* ME! ME! ME!!!! I would live there if I could but the chemical fume headaches make me come up for fresh air from time to time. Best thing ever! :sweat:
Yeah, I know, kind of old topic but I couldn't help it! I have never done dark room photography but I have always wanted to do it! I think it would be fun to do and I always enjoy learning something new.
Can someone explain to me what Dark Room is? it sounds interesting.
Dark Room photography is the traditional way of processing film. It's basically a pitch dark room with a few special lights, a room full of chemicals and machinery. Also you need the special photo paper where you can only open it in the dark room or else you ruin it. If you advance in it, you can learn the tricks you can do in photoshop as every photoshop trick originated from the dark room. It's quite tedious though. I had to leave the room several times because of the fumes were making me dizzy.
That sounds intense! Yet, at the same time, it sounds very exciting and something i'd want to try sometime!
I'm really jealous of anyone who has access to a dark room and can use one. Though I love the way a digital camera is so easy and at hand, I do love the idea of a dark room. It's where photography got its start, in my opinion, and I feel like it would give me an even deeper connection to my projects. I mean, how else do you get close to your art? In a dark room, you put all this time into making sure the photo is developed perfectly...
Man. I envy anyone who gets to use a dark room :]
Trust me, the quality of 35 mm cruds all over digital quality. Digital cameras, no matter how expensive or how handy they might be, rely on ONE thing: pixels. Traditional 35 mm film relies on ONE thing: the mirror inside it. Digital cameras are only popular because they are easy to transfer onto softcopy data like USB drives or CDs, while with the 35 mm you usually have to go to the mile of developing the film if not by yourself, by someone who knows how.
Traditional 35 mm sees what you see, because of the natural light that deflects off the inner mirror and into your lens.
Modern digital cameras, rely on the pixels the lens' captures making the camera automatically adjust to what it wants to see not you.
I worked with professionals who have done shots for newspapers covering the Olympics, and I happen to have both a Digital SLR and 35 mm SLR and I can tell the difference in quality.
yes! love it!
I'm a darkroom photographer when I have access to a darkroom. XD I took three years of photography in high school of which I had plenty of access, and then a semester in college for more access. It does take longer than digital but I've found it always felt far more rewarding.
I never had any problem with fumes, or known anyone else who had problems with them, but everyone is different. I just wanted to suggest that this may not be so large as a worry as some people might end up thinking.
The downsize though is how much it costs. *_* Paper and film adds up. Harshly. In high school I didn't have to pay for these but when I had to in college every time I used a piece of paper for an image that wasn't my final one, I always thought: Well there goes another $3 worth of paper...
I don't even bother, hey? I've done dark room prints a couple of times, but the digital camera is easier, less time consuming and has better resolution.
I do A level Photography and our very first project was in the school Dark Rooms (we have 3). It's very fiddly and since it's all on film, it's really scary knowing you could easily lose some good shots because the developing stage could go wrong if you don't get the right balance of chemicals. But other than that, it's quite cool and you get a lot of control over what the image looks like. I must say though, my burning and dodging skills leave something to be desired. I have a bit of a heavy eyeliner effect going on in a couple images
i've been working in a dark room for three years as part of the art program at my school, and i agree whole-heartedly with my teacher that while digital is an amazing and practically unlimited medium, a foundation in black and white or dark room photography is something that does nothing but strengthen your perceptive skills as an artist and as a digital photographer. the program at my school might be termed traditional because the focus during the first two years is based around techniques and usage of dark room photography and exploring in digital is either left outside the classroom or not permitted for classroom assignments until the third level, which i've just completed, where one is permitted to branch out into digital in an effort to find one's style, voice, and vision in photography as a whole. i've happily suffered the fumes and dim lighting and will continue to do so in the future, both because i enjoy working in the dark room and because i believe it's an asset that will do no harm to me in other mediums - ultimately, it's about what your eye perceives, and your observational skills, and i think these are things that many, if not all artists, should attempt to hone.
Welcome to RPG-Directory. Please enjoy your stay here!