Photography

[Dhepee]

I wish there was a machine that you could just load the film to and it would do all the rest for you. Maybe it does I don't know, really. It wouldn't be that hard to make I imagine.

There is, it costs about $15,000 - $20,000. They use them in professional photo labs.

[Byzantine Prince]

That's insane. It's like the price of a car. I'de rather build a darkroom in my basement. I'll just get a used bulk loader and buy all those chemicals. So what would it cost? Just so I can get an idea about what I'm gonna do here.

[Togakure]

I really enjoyed traditional B&W photography for a while. I took a class at the university and in doing so, got access to their labs where I did my own developing. With traditional B&W I think it's really important to develop your own photos, rather than take them to a developer. Learning how to "burn in" and things like that can turn a mediocre photo into an award-winner. The art is in the shot, but outright magic can be achieved in the darkroom.

Many students took photography as an elective, so the university suggested a nearby commerical lab for those of us who wanted to spend more time developing than the time allotted to us in the university lab. I remember the fees at the public lab were quite reasonable (most of the patrons being students), and it gave you access to nicely equipped darkrooms for a per use fee. They also carried many supplies, making it a nice "one stop shop." I found it to be a a very good deal, as I was not so "gung ho" to invest in making my own dark room. A fingerwalk through your local phone book might yield a list of commerical labs to call and inquire. You could also call your local college's photography teachers and ask ... .

Traditional photography and digital imaging are really two completely different disciplines. Photography is far more complex and difficult, imo. The power of digital imaging software is such that it makes it a lot easier to achieve beautiful results--but like vinyl records are to CDs, or analog synthesizers are to digital synths and samplers, there is a level of sublime art achievable with traditional photography that simply cannot be equalled by digital means. If you are primarily concerned with producing beautiful images and not concerned with "realism" and the technique used to achieve your end result, I would recommend digital imaging (a digital camera and photoshop is really all you need to get going). If you want to learn about photography, get a manual camera, take some classes (as with most things, the quality of your teacher is very important), and buy LOTS of film, as for every 30 shots you take, you'll be lucky to have one or two winners.