[Leica] Re: making conventional photography unconventional?

[Summicron1 at aol.com (Summicron1@aol.com)]

just out of couriosity, how much would it cost me to make 11 by 14 black and 
white digital prints of equal quality to what I get from 35mm leica 
negatives 
on Ilford multigrade fiber based paper ($60 for a 50 sheet box, at 
freestyle).

keep in mind, a huge part of my decision making is that I already own all 
the 
infrastructure for a wet darkroom -- focomat enlarger, M camera, R camera, 
lenses up the wazoo, all the trays and stuff so my only out of pocket, even 
30 
years later, is paper, film, and chemistry, the stuff never wears out and 
the 
ultimate goal -- something to hang on the wall -- is satisfied.

and I'm not some old fogie luddite -- I'm a working journalist at a mid-size 
daily (60 K) who makes slightly more money that school teachers in Utah, so 
infrastructure costs are a factor. We don't drink single malt here, we drink 
beer.

yes, digital is infinitely reproducible -- too bad ansel adams didn't have 
that, I guess, but it would also blow the hell out of the collector market. 
I 
like to be able to tell people "I made this." 

I don't have to think of just one print, either -- I've been asked to show 
in 
a couple of galleries around here and I'm working on my portfolio. I was 
noodling aorund some custom digital print makers on the net the other day 
and the 
price for quality digitalprints (as opposed to the "posters" the drug store 
knocks out" is about $10 or $20 or so each, which adds up pretty quickly, 
and I 
presume I have to have the ability to give them the equally high quality 
digital image, probably burned on a CD or something.

I know this sort of thing is cost effective for wedding photogs and the 
like, 
high volume, people like Tina, but what about us lonely basement artists?

tnx

c trentelman


In a message dated 3/6/05 10:23:23 AM, lug-request@leica-users.org writes:


> You would not however, be adding time to your "work flow" - you would no
> longer be processing film cutting negs, making contacts, going over
> contacts, and making prints. Instead you'd down load images, review them
> as positives, rather than as negatives, and making prints. The time it
> would take to make a print of equal or superior quality to those you
> produce in the wet darkroom would be greatly reduced. AND, and I find it
> interesting that no one has mentioned this lately, any time in the
> future that you decide you want another print identical to the one you
> make now, all you have to do is push a button, rather than go through
> the whole damn process all over again.
> 
>