Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]G. Michael Paine wrote: > Hi again, > So, you would defiantly go for a digital print as opposed to the old > projection of the film image on the photo paper? I guess I am just > stuck on the "the way it has always been". I would love to see some > images produced this way. > Once again, thanks. > Michael Yes, definitely. Consider a few advantages: ) The neg or slide is scanned once, so it's only exposed to high-intensity light once. Many exposures, such as when making multiple prints, are not a problem for silver B&W, but the cumulative effect on chromogenic films and Kodachrome is bad. ) dust and scratches are eliminated ONCE, then you SAVE THE FILE. Consider the difference this makes if you're making 100 prints of the same photo. ) black point, white point, color, contrast, density and the midpoint of the tonal range may adjusted in excruciating detail, down to individual pixels if nessesary. Then you SAVE THE FILE. ) if you're doing the adjustments yourself, you don't have to do it all in a single session as you would in a darkroom. If dinner is burning on the stove, the dog is attacking the neighbor's rabbit and the teenager's stereo is shaking the windows out of the walls, you can SAVE THE FILE and suspend your "lightroom" work momentarily to handle these little problems. There are many people who prefer the darkroom to the lightroom. I'm not one of them. Good darkroom prints of my photos resemble my slides. Good lightroom prints of my slides look exactly like my slides. The difference to print buyers is the difference between "these are very nice" and "how much do you want for these?". Doug (lightroom) Herr Birdman of Sacramento http://www.wildlightphoto.com