Losing Photography

What would we lose if school darkrooms closed? A question from early 21st century. Would photography end? What type of knowledge would be lost; why?

At that time we just had ideas of what would happen; however, after 20 years we know what was lost; more, we can see why.

As academic art programs shifted to provide useful current procedures, they began replacing darkroom space with lightroom systems. This was in response to anticipated growth of art practices which have always relied upon industry — as a source of material, and as a destination of graduates.

In 2002, a group of teachers wondered, and worried about the loss of darkrooms along with the knowledge of those processes. It was considered that we would lose the industrial secrets. The industrial lab system would also decline. Would it be useful to record some of that material?

As knowledge domain moved from the weekday world to the weekend hobby layer, we certainly lost information; about process along with details and depth of experiences. What would be forgotten?

Instead, that transition from work-horse to hobby-horse knowledge keepers was used as a banner, actually more a sash for craft badges by the internet forum folk. Could they be counted on to examine or expand claims, keeping the craft knowledge alive, healthy? Not really

gossip rules the hobby shop

It wasn’t forgotten, it was covered over in gossip. The hobbyists are more concerned that they’re losing influence not that knowledge is being lost.

In an effort to shout each other down, they’ve lost the ability to talk.

two sample young

image aspirations —
paths away from their origin.
corran makes water on rock pictures. where he started, he stayed., holmburgers: wanted to make original Klutes… he never did


destination was picture– one got there, the other did not. c wanted the standard picture of the forum he went to; chris didn’t. he started after a picture type; one doable with dye transfer. he got a major re-alignment — no longer doing pictures; gave up on dye transfer.


the pictures they wanted, working with another’s imagination, someone else’s process.

a mask– first mistake is to call it ‘correcting’
it is a piece of film atop another. it increases density, firstly.
they do not have to be silver, they can be colored, can be made of color film

what happens when you ‘print’ a c-41 neg onto a c-41 negative?
how will that ‘print’ look?

Finding Film Data

We are in times of out dated film — film from unknown storage — film without datasheets. So, to the netfora with a question; like the camera counter of last century, except, these people are retired accountants, roofers, support staffers. Few of them worked as photographers; fewer still kept their old notebooks, those collections of datasheets. Firms like Kodak produced massive stacks of data in the form of how-to guides, along with instructional books — not even mentioning the many datasheets inserted into countless boxes of film/paper.

So, to the Loud Forums with a question:

Kodak Copy Film

The answer is quick, intended to assist, but does it? How much help? Go somewhere else; look in a booklet you don’t have. Oh, and the obscure developers are wrong, but not really, they’re just flailing answers. The answer is online; in two archive books. And now here:

Kodak 4125 Copy Fillm

The exotic developer is HC-110 (Dil E). This film was used indoors, I used it at tungsten settings, EI:12. It was also used as a lab film, in darkroom using enlarger light. Read the guidance about exposure and control of highlights. That is why it could be used in a masking system, and in duplicate negative making, although, I used dupe negative film for that: made it a one-step process.

So, I could pass this info on to the Loud Forumists; why don’t I? I don’t have a login. They are boring people trapped and trapping others, like some vast herd stuck in bogs.