Re: [Leica] The quintessence of Leica photography?

["Isaac Crawford" <isaacc7@home.com>]

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Erwin Puts" <imxputs@knoware.nl>
To: "L U G" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 6:26 AM
Subject: [Leica] The quintessence of Leica photography?


> The seemingly relentless march of digital printing does signify two
trends.
> First of all a loss of knowedge of true and important photographic
> principles. If we might wish to agree that a black of density D=1,4 is all
> that is needed for the impression of blackness in a print, we also have to
> agree that we are no longer  interested in expanding our technique nor our
> visual sensitivity.

Ummm, then I guess that all those poor, misguided fools that make platinum
prints are no longer interested in expanding their technique or visual
sensitvity... Especially considering the amount of detail they're throwing
out the window... Those big negs have so much more information that simply
cannot be revealed on the heavily texured paper that is commonly used for
this "inferior" technique... And the Dmax is terrible as compared to silver
halide prints...LOL!:-)
    Seriously though, there are different types of printing for different
types of results. While it's true that current inkjets are not as good in
some areas, they more than make up for their deficits with their strengths.
As other people have pointed out, we are just at the tip of what is possible
in digital printing and we should be excited, not dismayed at the potential.
As far as I'm concerned, as long as I keep using my Leicas, I will be
learning more about the craft of photography. The digital process (scanning,
photoshop, printing) is a much better way of learning printing technique
IMHO than the darkroom is. This is because I am forced to deal with the
materials on a much more intimate way (scanning res, histograms, channel
adjustments, gamma correction, paper selection, color profiling, etc..) than
is necessary in a chemical darkroom.

Isaac