[Leica] Tina and Digital (was, Enlarger

[lists at tomwestbrook.com (Tom Westbrook)]

Well, dogsdiarrhea! Labeling a process that many thousands quite happily 
use as archaic and, by inference, futile and doddering, fits my 
definition of disparagement. It is most certainly NOT "an artifact of 
the photographic past", either, being quite alive and well. You may have 
closed the book on wet darkroom printing for yourself, but that only 
makes it an archaeological artifact to you, not to anyone else.

Sorry to carry on about this, but it chaps my derri?re to no small 
extent when a misconception like this starts growing wings.


B. D. Colen wrote:
> Oh holypuppypoop! No one ever suggested that people shouldn't use what 
> suits
> them. The Daguerreotype process still suits a tiny handful of people, and
> they do amazing work. But that doesn't mean that the process is not an
> artifact of the photographic past - nor is labeling it so disparaging; it's
> just honest. ;-)

-- 
Tom Westbrook
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom_westbrook