Well, taking photos and developing them and processing them is a creative process, whereas playing someone else's record isn't. I think that is the difference between those two hobbies.
Well, taking photos and developing them and processing them is a creative process, whereas playing someone else's record isn't. I think that is the difference between those two hobbies.
Current Lash Up:
TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.
Main System
Turntable: Heavily-modified Technics SL-1210MK5G [Mike New bearing/ETP platter/Paul Hynes SR7 PSU & reg mods]. Funk Firm APM Achromat/Nagaoka GL-601 Crystal Record Weight/Isonoe feet & boots/Ortofon RS-212D/Denon DL-103GL in Denon PCL-300 headshell with Funk Firm Houdini/Kondo SL-115 pure-silver cartridge leads.
Paul Hynes MC head amp/SR5 PSU. Also modded Lentek head amp/Denon AU-310 SUT.
Other Cartridges: Nippon Columbia (NOS 1987) Denon DL-103. USA-made Shure SC35C with NOS stylus. Goldring G820 with NOS stylus. Shure M55E with NOS stylus.
CD Player: Audiocom-modified Sony X-777ES/DAS-R1 DAC.
Tape Deck: Tandberg TCD 310, fully restored and recalibrated as new, by RDE, plus upgraded with heads from the TCD-420a. Also with matching TM4 Norway microphones.
Preamps: Heavily-modified Croft Charisma-X. LDR Stereo Coffee. Power Amps: Tube Distinctions Copper Amp fitted with Tungsol KT-150s. Quad 306.
Cables & Sundries: Mark Grant HDX1 interconnects and digital coaxial cable, plus Mark Grant 6mm UP-LCOFC Van Damme speaker cable. MCRU 'Ultimate' mains leads. Lehmann clone headphone amp with vintage Koss PRO-4AAA headphones.
Tube Distinctions digital noise filter. VPI HW16.5 record cleaning machine.
Speakers: Tannoy 15MGs in Lockwood cabinets with modified crossovers. 1967 Celestion Ditton 15.
Protect your HUMAN RIGHTS and REFUSE ANY *MANDATORY* VACCINE FOR COVID-19!
Also **SAY NO** to unjust 'vaccine passports' or certificates, which are totally incompatible with a FREE society!!!
Location: gone away
Posts: 4,870
I'm joe.
Surely digital photography has taken the developing and processing process away, and replaced it with the likes of Photoshop? Is that still a 'creative' process?
It's a weird thing, photography. Even weirder is photo-realist painting, where paint is used to produce the same effect as a photograph:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photorealism
Location: East Riding of Yorkshire these days
Posts: 4,779
I'm Shaun.
To a point as I only shoot black and white. I do not use filters because I see no point in putting a thirty quid filter on the front of an eight hundred quid lens, however when I used to print onto a variable contrast paper I had to use a dichroic head of course. These are only in the source of light though so not image forming. The reality is though that I used to mainly use graded fibre based papers for purity at all stages. I guess due to the fact I print in black and white I cannot be interested in accuracy to the source can I...? And of course, now that I only shoot digitally the sky is the limit when it comes to removing oneself from any kind of 'accuracy'. Therefore, I am not interested in photographic accuracy in the same way I am not interested in audio accuracy.
Location: East Riding of Yorkshire these days
Posts: 4,779
I'm Shaun.
Yeah, to take Grant's comment, it is the artist in us. Photography is indeed a highly artistic craft displaying one's skills of detail and creativity. Sitting back listening to music is definitely not artistic. You are simply not creating anything as an extension of your artistry however you are moulding together a means by which you can appreciate another's art and musicianship.
I have never looked upon photography as art but I still do look upon photography as a craft. Digital photography, the sort I do now, has a much wider scope for theatrics than traditional silver halide photography. In black and white, my faved form,
the images I can create now especially with my 14mm lens are phenomenally more expressive than I ever could with more traditional means.
OK, I haven't a bloody clue where this is going.
Location: East Riding of Yorkshire these days
Posts: 4,779
I'm Shaun.
Location: gone away
Posts: 4,870
I'm joe.
Obviously.
There's the mystical ritual involved in removing a record from its sleeve, handling it by the edges to avoid fingerprints, placing it on the platter, checking the VTA, then slowly lowering the stylus into the groove, sitting back in your reclining chair, tapping your foot as the music starts, reading through the sleeve-notes and admiring the Roger Dean artwork on the cover, listening out for the bit where the drummer hums along, then wondering if maybe a change of speaker cable would help reveal whether his humming is in fact out of tune, then mentally composing a forum post asking for advice about this. As a piece of performance art, there's more creativity in there than in all the Turner prizewinners put together.
Location: East Riding of Yorkshire these days
Posts: 4,779
I'm Shaun.
Oh dear, here we go again...
I do not truly believe that digital imaging is actually photography at all. It is IT and the skills set required to do it is completely different. Photography, as in 'true' photography demands a quite in depth knowledge of chemistry. In fact it still does of course especially if you go down the route of formulating your own developers and/or messing with liquid emulsions but I turned my back on all of that because I no longer saw the point. Back to point No1.