name [neym] (noun)
1. a word or a combination of words by which a person, place, or thing, a body or class, or any object of thought is designated, called, or known.

What is in a name? Interesting question for sure! There are times that a name has little meaning, other times it can be the key to an empire. Companies spend untold sums of money in the creation of a name for their products. Their chosen names are trademarked and protected by law. Some names are household words and are part of our everyday life. There are times when a name is extremely important.

There is a revolution brewing in the world of photographic art. The digital vs. analog debate is raging on, and at times is near a war rather than a debate. There are people aligned on both sides and most have made their choice. I can say without hesitation that I have made my decision and I plan to stay the course. It matters not what your preference may be as to the photographic medium you choose. The choice is a very personal and serious decision. You need to be comfortable with your selection and dedicated to its use.

The problem is there needs to be a clarification of terms used in photography today. The various forms that photography has taken on in these more modern times has lead to a lot of misunderstanding and confusion. The general public, along with even those in the fine art photography world, have trouble understanding and defining exactly what modern-day photography has become.

There is this grand misnomer that digital is a replacement for film. There was even a wide spread rumor that film was dead. This is nothing but a pure deception. . . little more than a marketing ploy by people in the photo industry that do not have a clue as to what photographic art is about. Do not buy into the farce that film is dead.

But I digress from my original topic. . . now back to the question at hand. What we need is to be more specific about photographic art. Gone are the days that the word photograph was assumed to mean a procedure based on film and the wet process. Photography has branched out into a more complex art form. Digital photography is a new art form, not a replacement. It is a new way of making images. Because of this new medium there is a lot of confusion pertaining to the process. Each medium has its own peculiarities, strengths, and weaknesses. . . each needs a name. We need to be more specific in the description of the imaging process. After much thought, I have defined three areas that encompass photography today.

1. Traditional Photography

This process has numerous subcategories which are all based on an imaging process that uses film, a wet darkroom, and chemical processes from start to finish. Simply, the way photographs were made before the introduction of digital imaging. This also includes the numerous alternative processes that are still practiced today. This is my choice for the creation of all of my photographs, thus for me using film and the 100% wet darkroom process, my finished print on gelatin silver paper, would be identified as a Traditional Silver Gelatin Photograph.

2. Hybrid Photography

This process is new and is comprised of those that mix traditional and digital together. Some choose to shoot film and then use digital means for the finished product. There are also processes that incorporate digital means to produce a negative that is ultimately used for a wet processed product. This is a very popular art form today and it needs its own definition. . . hence, the term Hybrid. For example, if you are a platinum printer that uses digital negatives, your print should be labeled Hybrid Platinum Photograph.

3. Digital Photography

This is pure digital from start to finish. A digital camera is used to capture the image, computers are used for post processing, and a digital printer is used for the finished product. A Digital photograph is 100% digital in its creation from start to finish. If you work in this medium and use an inkjet printer the print should be labeled a Digital Inkjet Photograph.

This is how I choose to define photography in the modern world. There are three distinct categories of imaging and each should be properly defined. It should be obvious as to which art form I practice. From now on when asked, I will say I am a Traditional Photographer and my prints will be labeled Traditional Silver Gelatin Photograph. Just that simple!

This is my choice and has absolutely nothing to do with anything other than it is what I feel correctly reflects the different types of photography. If you have chosen to be a digital photographer and work in that medium, why be ashamed of it? Same if your work is produced by the hybrid method. Why not be proud enough of your chosen medium to accurately define it and not hide behind the general, and now somewhat vague, idiom of Photography? Just keep in mind that none of these three categories are the same and none is a replacement for any of the others. Each is simply its own art form and they all fall under the general category of Photography.

So, what is in a name? What you call something can mean a lot, especially when you are trying to define your craft. What is your choice. . . TRADITIONAL. . . HYBRID. . . DIGITAL. . . or. . . some combination of the above? Doesn’t matter, just define your chosen medium accurately.

JB

Years ago I found myself with access to a violin. I love the sound of a violin. There is something about a beautiful, single note when played by an accomplished violinist. There is a richness. . . a richness of sound. . . a deep resonance, with harmonious overtones in just a single note. I thought this can’t be that hard, you just draw the bow across the string and out comes the sound. Not quite for me though. I even resorted to reading a little in the beginner’s book on bow technique. But, no matter how hard I tried, it always sounded like someone dragging a heavy metal chair across a concrete floor. It was immediately apparent that I really did not want to learn the technique that bad. That was the end of my effort with the violin.

So, what does this have to do with photography you ask? Well, maybe nothing. . . maybe a lot. . . depends on your point of view and interest. No matter what the commercial says, there is no easy, quick way to anything. . . and. . . believe it or not, you can never have it all, and there is no free lunch! Life is about choices. If you spread yourself too thin, you will never achieve anything. If you sort of think you are interested in LF or ULF photography, you are setting yourself up for failure. LF, and especially ULF, is not easy, not foolproof, and is hard work. There are many pitfalls that will frustrate and test your patience. If it can go wrong, it will! You have to really want to work with LF or ULF. You have to be able to find your way through all of the little things that will ruin your every effort. If you are determined, and if you really have the desire, you can, and will master the craft. Persistence and patience will pay off in the long run. But, if you are looking for instant gratification, find another interest.

I would never recommend that anyone jump into LF or ULF photography. It is just not for the faint of heart. . . those that are not dedicated enough to invest in the time it takes to master the process are doomed to failure. Sort of like playing the violin. I am really glad I didn’t buy a violin just to find out I actually didn’t want to learn to play the thing. If you only have a casual interest, you just may be better off letting someone else do the fiddlin’ around.

JB