Saving Photography

Their first impulse is to denounce as not possible, not worth doing. by killing the young, they Stop them from taking their place. They lost their way so long ago, they don’t know where the path is.

They are stagnate. Small ponds do that.


Sep, 2016.. A new 20×24 enlarger project announced — 2 years later it was delivered even though the forum experts offered this:

–“Without a glass carrier ? How do you expect to achieve any focus accuracy worthy of negatives this big in the first place? Same goes for wide-angle enlarging lenses. Other than the LED light source itself, why try to re-invent the wheel? Big horizontal process cameras could easily be retrofitted for this kind of application.

I once threw out something like that, superbly made, just to cannibalize the suite of Apo Nikkor lenses.” AND “Anything autofocus reminds me of power windows on cars …. sooner or later you’ll wish there was still a traditional hand-crank. And metal changes dimensionally, so fine tuning the focus would be essential, which they have allegedly provided.”

[ you can’t because I couldn’t. — if you can, then I won’t be as important to my imaginary friends as I want to be]

/–/ intrepid, camera [2014 ,LFF 11-Aug-2014, 13:59 ], enlarger]]

On one forum accepting to roll film the announcement is greeted with:

Counting the travelwide, ferrania, new55, P6 petzval, CL81, plus a few Lomography lenses and probably a lot that I don’t know about, that’s a lot of combined love for Film around the place, makes me all warm and fuzzy…

However, for those Large Format Folks came offers of help:

“the body seems rather deep.

My thoughts also. I don’t see any reason why the back part can’t be half as deep as it is.

Look at current designs, old designs, prototype over and over. It really does seem more like an early prototype than an actually useful camera. Goodluck nonetheless.

AND the best after months of comments:

“I do hope all the nay saying is not putting you off. Most of the blather about movements is posturing anyway. Not many folk use them even when they have an abundance of them. Your pricing is attractive. The camera looks good enough to use. You might want to work on the knobs a bit to make them look less crude. Apart from that, if it is quick to set up in the field and doesn’t weigh a lot it will be a fine outdoors camera. Make sure the materials can withstand the rain…”

/–/ cinestill  2013 first chatter on photrio ]]

  • “All they’re doing is removing the remjet. I can do that myself.
  • Too expensive. Where can you process it
  • The colors won’t last. Hues will be wrong. Maybe okay for the ‘lomo’ crowd.

Of course cinestill is going strong — now providing 120 film, with 4×5 color negative expected to be coated in November. They are delivering enough product that Kodak 38 is surviving.

All of these companies are making product, even though the major forumatti of film didn’t think the products worth their interest. Probably partially explains why they, even with their years of ability, couldn’t develop the products they love to discount.

they start with a NO because they’re certain they KNOW more than you.

If at first they don’t succeed… they don’t want you to either. They don’t want to do it, and don’t like those who do, even tho too cowardly to say those words. instead, they say: but you can play [like permission to children]. or, ‘to each his own. no accounting for tastes [bad tastes]’ —

They never had a vision of the future so now they must cling to a fantasy past.