[Leica] Darkroom prints versus digital prints

["Robert G. Stevens" <robsteve@istar.ca>]

Mark:

I am up to date.

With a digital darkroom, you can make the fix, burn it back to film and
make a print.  This of course require a very good scanner and sending the
file to a service bureau for the burn onto film. Other than the sharpness
of the Ciabachrome, it has much more shadow detail than most scanners can
take off the film and put into the image file.

As for the wonders of Photoshop, some of these tools have darkroom names
because it could be done in a darkroom.  For the scratches in negatives,
have you heard of nose grease or touching up a print?  Other than the
sharpen filter, most photoshop techniques can be done by a good printer.  I
do not profess to be such a printer and do find some of Photoshop simpler
than the darkroom.  

My ideal will be when drum scanner quality reaches the desktop scanner.  A
fellow member of our photo guild was over last week to scan some slides at
2700 dpi.  He was then going to edit them in photoshop and get them
transferred back to film.  He regularily makes 24 inch Ciabachrome prints
and will try one from the manipulated file put back onto a slide.  I will
let you know how this works.  He too would rather do the dodging and
burning in Photoshop and then create a slide he can make a straight print
from.

My original argument is that the Digital prints that everybody talks about
are not very permanent and do not look as good as a Ciabachrome print.  I
regularily print 11X14 and the biggest my Fargo Dye sub will do is a little
less than 8X10.  A dye sub Fargo that does larger than 8 inch wide prints
is probably over $4,000 and does lay down the UV layer.  The Leica V35 and
Jobo is still cheaper at around $1,600.

As for the longevity of Ciabachrome, it is twenty years before a noticeable
change happens in display conditions, 250 years or so in dark storage.  Get
out an old family album, or look at prints you may have on the wall, and
you will see that prints less than twenty years old on normal colour paper
are very faded. The very best dye subs and inkjets still do not last more
than a year without noticable fading.  There are new ink tecnologies that
are coming for inkjets that use oil based inks, that may prove to be more
permanent.

I would suggest you make your best print of a slide using a computer method
and then have a Ciabachrome done and compare them.  You will be surprised.
I am sure there are other members on this list that can back me up on this.

Regards,

Robert



At 07:13 PM 7/17/98 -0700, you wrote:
>robert,
>
>i think you miss a point and are not quite up to date.
>
>missing point:
>
>with a digital darkroom you can fix it once and then print as many
>fixed prints as you like. the fixes are much easier to make (try 
>unscratching a negative or slide for instance).
>
>up to date:
>
>there are now dye subs (the kodak for instance) that print on photographic
>paper and use a UV pass to create archivable prints with the kind of
>longevity that you cite for cibachrome (20+ years).
>
>whatever, it's great that you are happy with cibachrome ! i am fairly
>sure that cibachrome will portray that "leica difference" better than
>anything digital under $10k....
>
>mark
>
>Robert G. Stevens wrote:
>> 
>> Alex:
>> 
>> Having tried both ink jets, dye sub, and Ciabachrome, I have come to the
>> conclusion that ink jet prints and dye sub prints pale in comparison to a
>> Ciabachrome Print.  When you print on the high end ink jet papers and
>> factor in the printer consumable,  Ciabachrome is not much different in
>> price.  As far as the rest of it goes, a darkroom is probably cheaper than
>> a computer, Photoshop, slide scanner, and high end printer.  Add it all up
>> some time.  My used V35 enlarger was about $1,000 and the Jobo Cpe2 new was
>> about $600.  That is $1,600, about the price of a Nikon Scanner.  Add a
>> dark closet and you have all you need to make prints.
>> 
>> The other thing that is missed in most of these digital darkroom threads is
>> the lack of permanence of the image and the limited image size.  An ink jet
>> or dye sub print will start to noticeably fade in a matter of months, while
>> a Ciabachrome print does not show signs of fading until about twenty years
>> on display.  With digital, you could reprint the file every six months or
>> so and have a sort of permanence.
>
>
>
>