Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/05/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In my case they are photos for scientific purposes; they need to match to be comparable and provide data to support a publication. They need to match. Marty On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > It's "matching" now. > The idea that if you have a bunch of pix on the wall half of them shot with > film the other half with a digital camera they should all "match". > I wonder why? Would you make your albumin prints match your salt prints? > I think in the darkroom you make the best print you can make and when > you're > sitting in front of your monitor with Photoshop and Lightroom you make the > best image you can make. > Altering your digital captures to look like the stuff you used to do > strikes > me as very unnecessary; a bit odd, and a bit abhorrent. > I say make the best digital print can can make and forget about your > darkroom work. You're not in the darkroom any more. The materials you are > using are way different and have very little resemblance to the ones you > used in the 90's and before. > For many darkroom prints were grainy and a bit crude looking. With jacked > up > contrast and obvious dodging and burning. That's the difference between > what > we're getting now in digital. That and the obvious noise in shadows vs. > highlights. And the fact that in a gallery setting darkroom prints were > semi > gloss dry down and inkjet prints are made on 100% rag. > > - - from my iRabs. > Mark Rabiner > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information