2013-02-19 // 13:10:57
g.
my add to it would be similar to Arnes, but for the digital workflow: The observation in general is true, and is especially valid for most consumer systems. it is not (in the dimensions of really altering) for a calibrated system.
but, the problem we run into here in this case shown, and nowadays often, is that if we scan an expired 55 negative, it gets difficult, as even the filmbase varies from age to age, from sheet to sheet, from clearing to clearing. and then, we have a negative, which only bears a positive (and also, in more levels as the print, but this is a general fact about negatives), and we only can guess what is the "true image", as we cannot see it.
however, as much as I like scans as close as possible to the haptics of the original for positives, I do like the working with the expired negatives. my workflow would still be analog-orientated, and maybe because of that, and the experience with the material, it is one of the rare ways where I can work with something one may call "digital random". but basically, it still deals with the fact that a negative always bears more information.

ahh, good topic.
I'm still trying to sort my thoughts, refining them. i.e., the filmbase, even if it varies, one still can calibrate it, or try to get as close as possible. but it is a time-consuming process. and one still would have a choice which route to go.

^ I find this whole discussion even more interesting in the context of instant film. There is an idea that an instant image is more "pure" or "real" than a digital photo or even a traditional film negative, perhaps because it is an analog process or perhaps because the perception is that once the image is ejected from the camera or peeled apart it is complete unto itself and beyond manipulation; it is fixed precisely at the moment of its creation. That may be true for the print you hold in your hand, but once that image is scanned, suddenly a whole new series of choices presents itself. Do I change the contrast? Do I change the color cast? Do I darken or lighten parts of the image? For example, when I shoot with expired Spectra film the images come out very pale with an orange cast. If I adjust the scan so that the colors are more balanced and saturated, have I gone too far? If the scanned image looks nothing like the "real" image, has some unwritten rule been broken? It depends on how sacrosanct one considers the original. Is fidelity to the original the most important thing? Or is it presenting an image that matched what one envisioned when the shutter was pressed? And as you point out, in the case of Type 55 or Type 51 negatives, we MUST make alterations (e.g. inverting the scan) in order to present them as positives, and matching the scan to the negatives becomes meaningless since one is a complete reversal of the other. Polanoid.net expressly forbids the uploading of "fakes," but how do we define a fake? Which is more authentic: a digital photo placed into a Polaroid border and presented as "real," or a genuine Polaroid image digitally manipulated and changed beyond recognition? The point of origin seems to be important. If a photo began its life as an analog print or negative, it is said to be authentic. But how far can that authenticity be stretched before it breaks in the digital workflow? I am not a purist myself, although I do try to make my scans looks as close to the originals as possible, within reason. (Whatever THAT means!) Anyway, thanks for your detailed response.

2013-02-19 // 11:24:12
arnevandermeer
Nice reminder. :-). I have to add : even when working in the darkroom one can get quite differrent results out of the same negative. I guess the only "true" picture is the polaroid positive..

^ I think it is true that there are no "pure" images, at least not when it comes to digitizing them. But you're right that darkroom work involved lots of manipulation as well (dodging and burning, masking, toning, etc.) There are at least two basic aspects to all of this: there is the choice of camera, lens and film, which each alters the "reality" of the scene in some way, and then there is the way we present the image to the world. If we were to simply frame the Polaroid positive and put it on the wall, then it will exist in a relatively pure state for the viewer. But as soon as we print, enlarge or scan the original, we introduce another layer of abstraction or interpretation.