Comments on: Is Lightroom the Darkroom?

By: manjil

manjil — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 04:19:45 +0000

i will say yes, caz in my view…. the name “lightroom” is given to remove the old tradition of developin a film in a “darkroom”. Light room is advance darkroom which is totally digital and easy to use

By: Gayna

Gayna — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:19:00 +0000

Thanks! I will give it a try.

By: Matt Kloskowski

Matt Kloskowski — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:36:16 +0000

Gayna,
You can publish directly to your website by clicking the Upload button at the bottom right in the Web module. And LR will indeed resize all of your images for you.

By: Gayna

Gayna — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 21:55:32 +0000

I posted this question before on July 14th but I can’t find it or an answer here so I’ll try again.
Can I publish a website page made in Lightroom 2 to my existng website? I’m hoping to change my whole site to one made in Lightroom but I would like to make it a page at a time for now.
Also, does Lightroom’s website creator automatically size the pixels of my images for the web or do I do that somewhere in the web section? Are they automatically reduced to 70 dpi?
Thanks,
G

By: Jim R

Jim R — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 04:14:45 +0000

I still use a 4×5 view camera and scan the negs at 3200 dpi and then use lightroom as my darkroom.So to me it is still a “Darkroom”,a lot cheaper than 20 or 30 thousand for a digital back of the same size.I doubt if I am the only one who scans negatives and does the burning, dodge and other adjustments with Lightroom.

By: Les Booth

Les Booth — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:40:22 +0000

If the point of using the word ‘darkroom’ is to instruct TECHNICALLY, How To Do photography, the darkroom may be quaint, but it’s not relative to the photographic process today.

However, if the word ‘darkroom’ is used to instruct HISTORICALLY, How To Do photography, then it is not only relative, but essential to the understanding.

I, too am one of the ‘older folks’. I’m 58 and I cut my teeth on film when I was 5 years old. I entered my first ‘darkroom’ at 10 and was immediately ‘hooked’. I didn’t actually develop my first roll of film until I was 19; first print at 23. But in the 20 years I spent in the ‘wet/dry darkroom of black/white film development and printing; and the occasional color printing foray; I loved the experience.

I found the replacement for my love of the darkroom experience in 1989; five years before I found I could no longer work in a darkroom, again; ever.

In 1989 I discovered what would become Photoshop and in 1994 I found I had developed a toxic allergy to the chemicals used in the darkroom. Thus, my transition to the use of the so-called, ‘digital darkroom’ was both chosen and forced.

I do not miss the chemicals, cost and frustration of the film lab: either shooting or developing. But I would not trade the knowledge and experienced developed under their tutelage for anything. They DO make a difference.

I just hope the loss is NOT in the historical legacy of where and how photography began. I know from first-hand personal experience, the deep cost of ignoring the wisdom in following historical direction. I should have realized that Eugene Smith and I followed the same path of darkroom abuse and would likewise reap the same rewards. But in my rush of youth, I did not consider it. Period. Mr. Smith accrued a boatload of awards and total banishment from the darkroom. Me, I just slew a boatload of attempts at ‘greatness’ and also received total banishment from the darkroom.

Regardless of the beginning and middle, it is the end where we all find commonality.

I’m not sure how one can totally bridge the information and experience gap – now growing around us – without some loss in the process. This is a problem with being at the ‘edge of a technology transition’. There are losses and gains; both range wildly to either side of the equation.

It is, in this realm, that exists the job of the ‘keepers of the legacy’. I call them Heritagekeepers.

These are the members of an older generation, who work to archive the components of a legacy – whose variety are are as diverse as humanity itself – in the care of those who appreciate it, while those who do not yet possess such a caring, grow into the time when they will care; and will be very glad there were those who cared, for them.

How costly will a transition from analog photography to digital photography become? It is as yet, unclear.

If we are wise in our transition, we can reduce the most serious cost: human historical loss. If we pay attention to the dues requirement and learn to NOT!! ‘…toss the baby out with the bathwater.’, we will do a great service to those generations to follow.

If we do not. Then we just add another burdensome cost upon the next generations.

By: ReneG

ReneG — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:57:31 +0000

Exactly.

Matt, in 10-15 years from now, a student at your Seminar will raise his hand and ask you: “Why is it called Lightroom?”

By: Pepe

Pepe — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:46:57 +0000

I totally agree with this analogy because I was born in the 70´s. So you can imagine: I heard to music on LP’s and cassettes, changed TV channels turning a knob, making phone calls turning a disc for each number dialed, learned to drive on a “standard transmission” car and yes, started taking pictures with a manual film camera. Even tough, I got seriously involved in photography until 2007, so I am of those that had never set a foot inside a darkroom. But I really admire the work and knowledge you have to use in there! I mean, going digital has its own tweaks and turns, but doing it “manually” and “wet” has its own special merits that should not be ignored. Say it is a tribute, say it is history, you name it! The real thing is that no LIGHTROOM would have existed ever without the knowledge base that came out form de REAL DARKROOM. And everyone who wants to know about photography should learn how the things were made in the past.
Remember: It is always said that “we are the result of our history”

By: Sue H.

Sue H. — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:48:40 +0000

I grew up in the age of film, thought I never worked in a darkroom myself. But maybe it’s because I’m a computer geek, I only used the term “digital darkroom” for maybe a few months in the early days of digital photography. Over the last several years, I naturally progressed to the term “post processing”.

By: Wojciech

Wojciech — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:27:43 +0000

I’m 25 i do photography for 3 years and something but first steps were analog with darkroom and i still consider them my best. not only because i used a torture camera zenit but mainly i used darkroom. so much fun, expectation, failure, dissapointment but mostly hard work and when job is finished – pride

thats why when using lightroom i feel different and i’m glad it has a different name, cause for me darkroom is darkroom, not my bedroom with comfy chair and a laptop:)