Forums > Photography Talk > marked-up darkroom prints

Photographer

Mortonovich

Posts: 5621

San Diego, California, US

Cool article showing some marked-up darkroom prints.
Man . . . . that is some attention to detail!!

http://petapixel.com/2013/09/12/marked- … -darkroom/

Sep 12 13 07:38 pm Link

Photographer

Leonard Gee Photography

Posts: 16523

Sacramento, California, US

Sometime it took many hours to days for one print. Gets bad when you have to cut dodge and burn masks on black paper. The scribbles become important when the clients says "Can I get another print of that?" It was also important to make two copies of every important print anyway.

Sep 12 13 07:49 pm Link

Photographer

GER Photography

Posts: 8011

Imperial, California, US

WOW!!! A peek into the mind of a MASTER of image making!!

Sep 12 13 07:51 pm Link

Photographer

Mike Collins

Posts: 1955

Orlando, Florida, US

This is a pretty well known one from Richard Avedon...or his studio manager.

http://aphelis.net/avedons-instructions/

Sep 12 13 08:10 pm Link

Photographer

R Michael Walker

Posts: 11987

Costa Mesa, California, US

I have a book called "the Darkroom". It shows 20 famous art photographers (Harry Callahan, Wynn Bullock and others) and how they worked in the darkroom to get their look. Nothing "straight" about any of their imagery.

Sep 12 13 08:28 pm Link

Photographer

David Simpson Images

Posts: 1328

Bangor, Maine, US

Next time someone dumps on photoshop and says they get it right in the camera like the old masters did we should whip this page on them. Master printers were the photoshop of the masters. Film had its limits and images have always needed massaging.

Great article.

Sep 12 13 08:30 pm Link

guide forum

Photographer

Giacomo Cirrincioni

Posts: 21416

New York, New York, US

This is awesome Chip, thank you!

Sep 12 13 08:31 pm Link

Photographer

FleM1984

Posts: 23

Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands

Haha I mark mine as well but this is eehmmm different wink

Sep 13 13 06:31 am Link

Photographer

Mike Collins

Posts: 1955

Orlando, Florida, US

David Simpson Images wrote:
Next time someone dumps on photoshop and says they get it right in the camera like the old masters did we should whip this page on them. Master printers were the photoshop of the masters. Film had its limits and images have always needed massaging.

Great article.

I agree 100%  People who really don't understand photography don't realize it's a "process".  There is capture. Then there is process, development and print.  It has ALWAYS been that way.  Even a Polaroid had to be developed.  But even IT could be manipulated. 

Film and digital chips have limitations and we can only do so much "in camera", so the rest we rely on the processing, development, retouching and printing stages...of the process.

Sep 13 13 07:22 am Link

Photographer

PhillipM

Posts: 6627

Martin, Tennessee, US

I'm a novice at best in the DR, and still find it mind blowing just to dodge and burn, and compare one print to the next....

Sep 13 13 07:31 am Link