On 2020-08-08 10:39 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
On 8/8/2020 8:16 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2020-08-08 3:13 a.m., VanguardLH wrote:
Ken Blake wrote:

Feel free to disagree. I don't want to start an argument over this, so
as far as I'm concerned, this is the end of the thread.

Over 50 years ago when I dabbled into film and a darkroom, but only for
a few years, I never called them prints and didn't hear them referred to
as such.

Film processing:Â* developer, fixer, wash, dry.
Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* |
Photo processing: developer, fixer, wash, dry.

And, yes, I left out some steps, like the stop bath which is not always
used and a wetting bath to eliminate drying spots which can be separate
of the wash bath.

Both film and photos are exposed to light, both media use chemistry, and
both were developed.Â* Way back then, when dinosaurs still roamed (*), I
was not a professional, there was not even a concept of Internet nor
ARPANET to share information, and I read only a couple books but got
most of my info from Dad.Â* Back then, we /developed/ both film and
photos in a darkroom.Â* Old terminology tends to stick with old farts.
We say "they said" instead of "they says" and "he wrote" instead of "he
writes", and "light" is not spelled "lite".Â* This was a short-lived
personal hobby, so I was not exposed to the terminology used within the
industry.

Â*Â* (*) When I was a tyke, I'd ask Dad what it was like "back in the old
Â*Â* days".Â* He'd start to tell about the dinosaurs that roamed the Earth.
Â*Â* After a couple minutes, I'd catch on and say, "Oh, Dad", and he'd
Â*Â* laugh.

The lingo you use is what you were exposed to.Â* Sorry if I offended your
lingo.Â* Seems we are vehemently agreed, though, despite the triviality
of using different words.

Oh, the Wikipedia article you cited was written in 2019, not back in
1947.Â* When writing, the current language and learned by the author gets
used.Â* Not many English-speaking folks today write using Old English or
even with all the same terms or their definitions as of 70 years ago.
Twas a bad citation referring to something written a year ago as to what
was the terminology back then.Â* I'll agree with you that it was and is
called printing in the photographic industry.Â* My terminology was based
on a hobby and reflected the chemistry involved.Â* Don't remember anyone
having such an issue when I noted developing the photos.Â* After all, not
everyone that hears you say "byte" knows you didn't mean "bite".
Language is fluid.



These posts bring up old memories Of dark dark rooms. back in the 70s
and 80s I built a darkroom in my basement for myself and my sons, Who
were both into photography.
My younger son took photo processing as a vocation and has been a
Photolab technician since then.Â* He assures me thatÂ* Films are
'developed or processed' and The transfer of the film image to paper is
still called printing as it was way back then.


Thanks for agreeing with me. As I said, I know that's correct.



You're Welcome, Yep, correct, the truth prevails. :-)

Rene