[Daniel Smith Participant Posts: 98]

New Article Announcements & Discussions

on: April 10, 2022 at 7:27 pm

The article about Cactus “Tintype” images is not about Tintype. It is fake – nothing more than another digital computer trick.

If you are going to do Tintypes – get the tin, camera, lens and chemistry and do the real thing. Faking it is bad enough but calling it “tintype” is not good at all.

"A good still photograph, studied by an inquiring mind, frequently yields more information than a mile of moving images". Walter Cronkite, New York, June 1989

[Mark D Segal Silver Member Posts: 783]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #1 on: April 10, 2022 at 7:50 pm

He said it’s about “having fun” in the first sentence. So sit back, calm down, relax and enjoy.

No doubt it was fun, and what counts is that the photos have a lot of appeal whether you want to call them “fake” or not.

Mark D Segal Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8, SilverFast HDR, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop". Please check the PhotoPXL Store for availability.

[Daniel Smith Participant Posts: 98]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #2 on: April 10, 2022 at 11:00 pm

So he is “having fun”. Does not excuse the misuse and outright fabrication of tintype. As bad as “carbon print” with digital inks – which are not Carbon Prints either.

Get another term for what he is doing instead of stealing and bastardizing reality.

"A good still photograph, studied by an inquiring mind, frequently yields more information than a mile of moving images". Walter Cronkite, New York, June 1989

[Jeff Schewe Gold Member Posts: 121]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #3 on: April 11, 2022 at 12:12 am

Hum… the images were processed in the TinType app…so if they aren’t digital tintypes what are they? Fakes? Nope, they are just the results of a digital process, not a chemical process…

So, is it the process that’s more important than the final image? Sadly, too many photographer get addicted to process and forget the reason for the process which should be the final image…

I’m all about the image and couldn’t care less about process…but thanks for playing our game!

[Mark D Segal Silver Member Posts: 783]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #4 on: April 11, 2022 at 6:44 am

Daniel Smith wrote:

So he is “having fun”. Does not excuse the misuse and outright fabrication of tintype. As bad as “carbon print” with digital inks – which are not Carbon Prints either.

Get another term for what he is doing instead of stealing and bastardizing reality.

It seems that you haven’t heard of “artistic license”. It is a term-of-art that allows creatives to be creatives and to borrow from familiar nomenclature that conveys ideas to the viewers, eschewing the slavery of rigid adherence to the norms of yesteryear. As long as we all know this is what’s happening, and we do, it’s fine. I fully agree with Jeff that what matters is the end-result. Whether it was made in a chemical bath, from a computer application or a combination of the two is interesting to know, but that’s not what determines whether I would hang the photos on my walls.

Mark D Segal Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8, SilverFast HDR, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop". Please check the PhotoPXL Store for availability.

[Ralph Upchurch Participant Posts: 14]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #5 on: April 11, 2022 at 6:54 am

I bought the Tintype app a few years ago, and liked it a lot. But there is but a single plate style available, which is really limiting. I could easily recognize any image processed in the app by the distinctive grunge pattern.

So my  question for Jeff is why use the app as a first step? You have all those wonderful textures to choose from, and end up adding more anyway.

[Jeff Schewe Gold Member Posts: 121]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #6 on: April 11, 2022 at 11:39 am

Ralph Upchurch wrote:

I bought the Tintype app a few years ago, and liked it a lot. But there is but a single plate style available, which is really limiting. I could easily recognize any image processed in the app by the distinctive grunge pattern.

So my  question for Jeff is why use the app as a first step? You have all those wonderful textures to choose from, and end up adding more anyway.

Well, that was then and this is now…if you notice the images at the end of the article you’ll note that I have moved on from the app. But once you have a body of work I don’t feel the need to redo it. It is what it was, ya know?

[John Hollenberg Participant Posts: 63]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #7 on: April 11, 2022 at 12:41 pm

I enjoyed the article very much.  Unfortunately, the app is only available for iphone.  No android version available.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Re: Fake Tintypes – just more Pixelography

Reply #8 on: April 11, 2022 at 12:43 pm

Daniel Smith wrote:

So he is “having fun”. Does not excuse the misuse and outright fabrication of tintype. As bad as “carbon print” with digital inks – which are not Carbon Prints either.

Get another term for what he is doing instead of stealing and bastardizing reality.

Jeff, I am sure, is made of stern stuff – but some more tender souls might be upset by the degree of emphasis in your language, which strikes me for one as a little overwrought. Have a care.

Jeremy

• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by Jeremy Roussak.

[Author]

Posts