I had some of the same thoughts. But one can't be a Luddite about it. The Luddites invented sabotage, throwing their wooden shoes (sabots) into the newly invented machinery which they believed would destroy work as they knew it. The digital darkroom gives much to the process of creativity. It gives the possibility of printing to those without "real" darkrooms. The "essence of pinhole" will have the strength to stand on its own, and need not be defended against the advance of science. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jean Hanson" <jhan...@pon.net> To: "pinhole-discussion-request@p at ???????" <pinhole-discussion@p at ???????> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 6:53 PM Subject: [pinhole-discussion] wondering
> About the message two days ago; a member took a pinhole image, > "sharpened" it in Adobe or a digital method, and printed it out. I > wonder why we don't just take traditional lens photographs and smear > them a little and print them out to look like pinhole work. What is it > that we are doing? I love pinhole photography and am retired from > traditional photo studio work. So my sister asked me recently, "why are > you and your friends intent on taking bad pictures?" I have always felt > we had a kind of philosophy...we were trying to see the world, or time, > or light another way. And I am not down on digital....but it is hard to > explain to non- participants that we really are doing something, and > something important. If we sharpen the images to look like better > conventional photos, is something being lost? The mystery? The > understanding of an almost occult medium? An atempt to see what light is > really doing as it hits and wraps around an object? What can I tell my > sister? Jean > > > _______________________________________________ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??????? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???????/discussion/ >
