View allAll Photos Tagged dr5
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Compare this shot with a 28mm Biogon to a shot done with a Leica V-LUX 1's Vario Elmarit lens zoomed in to 35mm .
NIN at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
i've been really struggling to find a better scan than the 3 scans i've already posted from my 3 rolls of dr5 processed film. my hope was i'd have some wonderful b&w positives that i could use for another experiment that i have intended for quite some time, now i dunno if that can happen. it requires a well exposed b&w positive. and honestly, i have a hard time saying that i have even two frames that might have DECENT exposure from my three rolls.
this took some work, but among the best i'll get. i'm disgusted by dr5 labs. with the DMAX range they boast, i thought i could get some magnificent double exposures (run thru my holga & nikon F100 as i've done before). not so: very flat, most won't scan w/ decent exposure. this scan required my software maximum of +3.03 EV, +16 brightness, and yet still more tone leveling in ACR and photoshop to retrieve this image.
pathetic for $22/roll film processing costs. not even one beautiful frame on three rolls. i haven't had a ratio like that since my first darkroom work while taking photog classes years ago. maybe not even then, i dunno. sigh.
a long while ago (about 5 weeks ago), i decided i would try processing several rolls of b&w film with dr5 labs in Denver, CO after being intrigued by their proprietary process for quite some time.
if you have any interest in this lab and dr5 process at all,
i URGE you to please read my full review on my blog.
I absolutely will never use them again. read my review and experiences... then judge for yourself.
cheers.
--------------------
My new photography blog has yummy ice cream you can download! And fuel additives you can add to your car to triple your mileage!
---------------------
If you’d like to view my images larger… While I only allow my contacts to view my larger images (I generally upload at least 800px images on the long axis)…
a quick workaround I might suggest is to view my photostream as a slideshow. Works well for me. This is frequently how I view others’ ‘streams, and it will put a large image on black. just click the projector screen icon next to the stream or set. : )
---------------------------
on 01 jan 2010, I began a new journey w/ a flickr 365 group that i formed. The idea is that I strive to push myself daily; by exploring techniques, ideas, and experiments.
-----------------------------
Neil Armstrong Hall of Engineering at Purdue University and the moon.
Photographed with a NIkon F4 using a NIkkor 15mm f/5.6 wide angle lens on Ilford HP5 Plus 400 film shot at ISO 800 and DR5 reversal processed. The slide was scanned on a Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED. My objective was to capture all of the wing roof while not loosing the highlights on the sculpture. Exposure was set based on the sculpture pedestal, 1 stop slower.
The building was designed by Ratio Architects.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
NIN at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
I had always been curious what B&W Slide Film would look like. And while you can get Scala again, there's a lab that can turn almost any B&W Negative film into a B&W Slide. So a group of us decided to give it a go. Now one of my least favourite films in 35mm is Ilford HP5+ so it was the one I decided to go with. And you know, using the Dr5 process it actually looks awesome. Rich, contrastry, and excellent grain.
Nikon F5 - AF Nikkor 35mm 1:2D - Ilford HP5+ @ ASA-400
Processing By: Dr5
Scanner: Epson V700
Editor: Adobe Photoshop CC (2017)
NIN at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
NIN at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
NIN at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
The Adox film really brings the contrast. Nikon FM2n + 25/2.8 ZF, shot on Adox CHS 50 reveral processed by DR5.
NIN at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
NIN at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.
Street Sweeper Social Club at NIN/JA in Tampa. May 9, 2009. Nikon F5, 300mm f/4, Ilford HP5+ developed as reversal by DR5. Push +2 to ISO 1600.
Interesting process, but fairly expensive (my seven rolls of film with a 1600 push cost $118 to process) and it took three weeks to get the film back from the lab.
As a sidenote (which says a lot about any endeavor on the Internet), I shared these photos on the Flickr DR5 group so others who use the process could see what kind of results I got in a high-contrast concert setting. A month or so later I got email from user "SAH Photo" (Stacey Hoffman at www.sahphoto.com/) saying he didn't like the similarity of the content and demanding that I remove most of them from the pool. I looked to see if he was a moderator or group owner and he wasn't, so I replied and told him I didn't see him listed as a moderator. He replied and said, "Don't be a bitch." I removed a few of the photos I had in the group that seemed very similar and then today (July 28, 2009) I received notice that I'd been banned from DR5 and he's now a moderator. Whatever. It has greatly lessened my desire to use the DR5 process. That kind of snarky, cliquishness makes me feel like I'd be better off focusing my efforts on activities where feedback and collaboration are more prevalent. Life's too short to waste time interacting with that kind of people.
I mentioned this altercation to David Wood, who owns DR5. He said he knows Stacey Hoffman very well. He said that if I decided to stop using his DR5 process it was my loss. It's good to know what kind of people are behind this business. I guess that's a loss I can live with.
Update: Today (16 June, 2010) I received mail from David Wood. He said he was distressed at the "concocted comments" posted here and demanded that I remove all mention of him and his lab from my photos at once. He concluded with, "I'll not ask again." I'm not sure if this is a veiled threat or not, but it just reaffirms what I'd already suspected about Mr. Wood and his methods.
Update: Received via Flickr from David Wood on 17 June 2010:
truth? what did we do to you but process your film, & do a good job at that..?
you will remove your uncalled for remarks, that we had nothing to do with, or you will be hearing from my attorney.
I have your address and place of work. dont make me follow through.
am I clear.
Update: Email received from David Wood (info2@dr5.com) on 17 June 2010:
Sir
I have no idea what prompted your attack on our lab and me personally. Are you sane?
We did nothing but a top job for you and this is how you have repaid us, by posing negative comments I had nothing to do with.
What is it that you wanted from me that prompted this action? I have no clue what I could have done to prompt this?
Are you a grown man or a juvenile?
If you do not remove your uncalled for comments I will be forced to take legal action against you.
Please don’t make me go this route!
If you have not kindly removed this content , that has already been up for a year, by the weekend, I will instruct my attorney to file damages in court on Monday morning. You will then have to appear here in Colorado.
I still might sue you for all the time those have been up, but in the mean time you better take the comments down.
We had nothing to do with your issue! This is a very childish thing for you to have done and you will pay for it if you do not correct it.
A public apology might be a good place to start.