Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Notices

Go Back   Film and Darkroom User > General discussions > Art and aesthetics

  ***   Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks   ***

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 4th May 2010, 04:40 PM
vincent's Avatar
vincent vincent is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Co. Kildare Ireland
Posts: 876
Default Multiple Printing

How do members feel about using more that one negative to achieve a final image.
At one time it was a popular technique used in the darkroom and I used it on occasions to import a better sky with more impressive clouds. Printing infrared negs allowed me the opportunity to drop in a full moon to enhance the image when I thought it appropriate.

It never occurred to me to consider the integrity of what I was printing until the arrival of the digital age, which allows someone to have numerous photos (or part of) joined into a final image.
Nowadays I am reluctant to use the technique and just hope that the weather conditions suit my photo.
__________________
Cheers

Vincent - Not afraid of the dark
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 4th May 2010, 05:06 PM
Neil Smith Neil Smith is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Carmarthenshire Wales
Posts: 1,448
Default

I have no problem with it, but I would rather take the image the way I wanted it in camera.
I would be more inclined to use it to produce something that was not possible in camera. Like some of these surreal shots from John Heartfield

http://quazen.com/arts/visual-arts/t...hn-heartfield/


Neil
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 4th May 2010, 05:46 PM
TheoP TheoP is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: London UK
Posts: 129
Default

As Neil said I love using it when creating surreal images, it poses such a challenge that really interests me. With landscapes however I tend to try to get the best out of my camera in one neg.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 4th May 2010, 05:51 PM
Dave miller Dave miller is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6,322
Default

Since my finished prints bear little resemblance to reality I have nothing against those that wish to use multiple negative to achieve a particular effect that way. It’s something that I have never done, but that’s entirely due to lack of skill on my part coupled to a complete absence of suitable negatives.
__________________
Regards
Dave
www.davids.org.uk
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 4th May 2010, 06:06 PM
Richard Gould Richard Gould is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jersey Channel Islands
Posts: 5,433
Default

Its not something I have ever done, I don't have the skills to attempt it, but I have no objection to multple printing, it's whatever you need to do to produce the final print that you want,Richard
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 4th May 2010, 06:18 PM
B&W Neil's Avatar
B&W Neil B&W Neil is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: West Cornwall
Posts: 4,264
Default

I knew someone who used to do this back in the late 70s. The images that stick in my mind were suitable sections of his wife superimposed on sand dunes. The images worked quite well and he got very good at it. I think the secret is to keep it simple. Never tried it myself though.

Neil.
__________________
"The aim of art is to represent not the outward appearance of things, but their inward significance." Aristotle

Neil Souch
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 4th May 2010, 06:41 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,968
Default

I see no problem with this. Tim's book is full of such examples and how to do it as is the Ilford printing manual.

There's a world of difference betwen this and a deliberate "fake" which purports to be authentic for all the wrong reasons - usually financial and thus coming close to fraud.

It is difficult to define what constitutes a "fake" but most can usually agree on what a fake is.

The 1932 picture of "Nessie" in Loch Ness springs to mind.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 4th May 2010, 07:39 PM
Trevor Crone's Avatar
Trevor Crone Trevor Crone is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London
Posts: 2,609
Default

Something I did occasionally back in the early '80's but now prefer to be as 'straight' as I can. It really is a personal thing and I have no hang-ups if that is what is necessary to realise ones vision.

You might want to check out the work of American photographer, Jerry Uelsmann who used to say he only used one camera but used up to 6 enlargers to make his final print
__________________
"To the attentive eye, each moment of the year has its own beauty, and in the same field, it beholds, every hour, a picture which was never seen before, and which will never be seen again" Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Timespresent
Arenaphotographers
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 5th May 2010, 08:08 PM
vincent's Avatar
vincent vincent is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Co. Kildare Ireland
Posts: 876
Default

I must confess that I'm rather surprised at the lack of negative (pun intended) response to my post. I would have thought with the arrival of the digital age and its endless possibilities of the final image, would have forced us analogue user's to reconsider our art and its final image.

I believe that we should capture what we see before us as best we can with the film that we are using and not depend on importing other images to make up our final photo. While I accept that I don't see in B & W I am entitled to capture the scene in B & W because of the film that I'm using.

While I am a great admirer of Jerry Uelsmann's work I can't help but think that the great skill and imagination that he employed has been greatly undermined by the use of photoshop etc. Almost anyone with a little computer skill and an imagination can equal Jerry's work.

As I said, in earlier times I did employ darkroom techniques to produce a final image, but I am reluctant to do so now.
__________________
Cheers

Vincent - Not afraid of the dark
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 5th May 2010, 08:45 PM
DaveP DaveP is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 990
Default

My take on this is that multiple exposures are fine as long as they're disclosed up front. Unless the photo has (or placed in a context implying) any documentary value, in which case I'd say its a clear no-go.

I think in an age where anyone with enough time on their hands can technically create any "image" or graphic they want pixel by pixel on a computer that the (sometimes wrongly assumed) integrity of analogue images has a value which is more relevent today than anytime in history.

Obvisouly its not true that the camera never lies, but generally people viewing images that are not obvisouly artificially contructed (like a ducks head on a horse's body) tend to implicity assume they are not being lied to, even if the photographer is happy to do so.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Test printing Alansworld Monochrome printing techniques 10 13th April 2010 08:27 PM
novice printing Ade Ward Monochrome printing techniques 17 7th April 2010 09:01 AM
Do you carry multiple camera's ? Steve O Photography in general 23 24th February 2010 03:42 PM
Printing again with XTOL darkclassical Monochrome printing techniques 6 13th August 2009 12:19 AM
Lambda Printing Joanna Carter Alternate printing processes 3 3rd August 2009 04:10 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.