[Leica] The death of the silver gelatin prints

[richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man)]

Thank you Paul for the inforrrmative (there Montie, I made it up for you)
discourse. I'm glad that my mindless rant results in gems being shared!

Montie and BD, I really love the silver prints. I spent 4 months and
probably close to a thousand dollars (not counting the equipments) on
paper, chemical and transparency paper to get the digital negatives to
work. And the silver prints do look lovely but I couldn't get the
consistency or the shadow details that I need (I think this has to do with
more on the Z printer than anything else).

With the print I got from Digital Silver, the black is more.. convincing,
whatever, more depth, but otherwise, the inkjet print is better in all
other aspects of image look. I actually should mention that I tried a
company like digital silver a couple years back to see how
digital->darkroom print look, and it was also not as good then. I heard
great things about Digital Silver hence trying it again. Again, the Digital
Silver is quite good, no doubt about it. It's just by comparison that it is
lesser.

When I switch to an Epson printer, I will probably try the digital negative
again. So may be there will be a "Rebirth of Silver Gelatin Printing"
subject in the future :-). Not that I am into hyperbole or anything.

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Montie <montoid at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Totally agree!  I like silver so much it's
> difficult to be objective at times...but I do try!
>
> Montie
>
> B.D. wrote:
>
> >>...but there really is a depth to a good silver
> print that is not present in even the best pigment prints. That is not to
> say that the pigment prints aren't gorgeous (nor to invite a debate) -
> just to note that they are different.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>