Film Vs Digital (not the usual question)

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
D Cox
Senior MemberPosts: 6,957
Like?
Re: Film Vs Digital (not the usual question)
In reply to cmc1, 10 months ago

It depends on whether you are taliking about negatives or positives.

Positive colour transparencies (Kodachrome, Ektachrome, etc) were normally just sent off to the lab for standard development, and then put in a projector for viewing. No processing in the Photoshop sense at all. Even cropping was very difficult.

Professionals sometimes asked for a change to developing times to allow for over or under exposure. Occasionally positive film was developed as negative to give weird colours.

Colour negatives were almost always developed straight by the lab. Black and white negs were developed by the user (a few professionals  used a lab), and then printed in the darkroom. Here you could adjust the darkness of various areas of the print to bring out clouds, for example, or shadow detail. Much like Highlights-and-Shadows or Dodge and Burn in Photoshop, but much cruder.

Contrast can be varied by using different grades of paper. Or images with black and white but no greys could be made.

To get "creative" effects, you could solarize the print by turning the light on briefly during development - very hit and miss compared to doing it with curves.

A kit of chemicals called Colorvir could be used on a B&W print to give quite extreme (but not very controllable) Photoshop-filter effects. Google "colorvir images".

Prints could be cut up, stuck together and rephotographed. People Stalin had killed were removed from group photos. B&W prints could be hand coloured and then rephotographed on slide film (this could be very effective).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow