Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Gary, For some of us, it has nothing to do with being sloppy. People switch to digital printing for a variety of reasons. Mine is very simple: time. Back in the 80s, before I had children, it was entirely feasible for me to spend 2-3 hours each evening in the darkroom, making prints and learning the craft. Today it is not. In the past 5 years I lived in Belgium (until this February) I have made virtually no darkroom prints despite the fact that I had the best darkroom facilities of any place I have lived. Quality, affordable scanners and printers have been a godsend for me, allowing me to make prints again. The key difference is that my children can be around me while I play with Photoshop. And the typical print requires maybe 5 minutes of Photoshop work followed by 10 minutes of printing, time that I can spend doing things with the children (even if it is just watching cartoons together). So for me, the alternative is not between digital prints and traditional prints; it is between digital prints and no prints. I agree with Erwin that to get the best of Leica images traditional methods are best, and for my color slides that is exactly what I use: Kodachrome films, projected with a Super Colorplan lens deliver quality second to none. I am meticulous in processing of my B&W negatives, using a Jobo processor, fresh chemicals, strict temperature and time controls, keeping notes etc. Those negatives contain information that can perhaps not be fully extracted with the current generation of scanners and printers but that technology is improving. And if I ever have an opportunity to go back to traditional printing, then I will still have my excellent Leica negatives. So the way I see it, I have the best of both worlds. Nathan Gary Klein wrote: > I think the reason why the digital printing has took off like wild fire is > due to the fact that many photographers just simply are not good lab > technicians. They get confused with the controls that silver based > photography affords. The scanners help them with the image conversion to > digital and Photoshop helps them mask their mistakes. They are sloppy with > temperature control, sloppy with aggitation, sloppy with printing. If you > nail down your technique, you do respect black and white printing a whole > lot more and you end up with first rate results. Hey and I am saying this > with over 9 years of scanning images for a living and with nearly 15 years > of experience of black and white printing. > > I agree with other posters, however, that even though it is a little dated, > Ansel Adams, the negative really spells out the recipe for quality imaging. > > gck > Leica M, the quiet alternative... - -- Nathan Wajsman Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch General photo site: http://belgiangator.tripod.com/ Belgium photo site: http://members.xoom.com/wajsman/ Motorcycle site: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/1704/