Digital BW, The Print

I shoot both full frame digital as well as large format. 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 and
11x14. There is no doubt that digital makes life easier, and for most of my
commercial work is digital. For my personal work I still shoot film, mainly
black & white, and having compared an 8x10 contact print against a same size
converted RGB image I really do prefer the contact print. It has a smooth
tonality and sharpness and contrast that does not shout at you - that I do
not get from my 21 mpx Canon, the images are nice , but.......
 
I have, almost, but not quite, shut my darkroom down. One enlarger, down
from 3, just a few trays and the necessary chemicals for my contacts. I have
gone hybrid for most of my printing. Scanning the negatives and sending the
output via QTR to my Epson printers. This has the edge in paper choices and
it is more eco friendly, not dumping silver and other chemicals. My test
prints either end up as scratch pads, then when done off to the compost
heap. The worms make short work of the paper :)
 
The other advantage I see is I now have a negative I can put in safe
storage, and a digital file I can work on, well with the exception of my
11x14 negatives, anyone selling an Epson XL10000 scanner on the cheap
(really cheap)!
 
Just my 2 cents
 
Mike
 
 > I'm not trying to be confrontational, but after developing and printing
> my own B&W in home darkrooms for 30+ years I was never so glad as when I
> finally got rid of the last of my many film cameras (Minox, Nikons,
> Leicas, Rolleis and a 4x5 Crown Graphic) and associated darkroom
> equipment a half dozen years ago. (I did keep a half full bottle of
> Rodinal, just for old times' sake, but finally pitched that last year.)
> High resolution sensors give up nothing in terms of sharpness, compared
> to what I was used to on film. And I personally think I have a LOT more
> control of the final B&W result using digital capture in color and
> near-infinite availability of contrast correction in Photoshop, as
> compared with the 5 contrast filters I used to carry (and rarely use)
> with my film cameras.
>
> With the ever increasing quality of digital camera sensors, and (I
> assume - correct me if I'm wrong) decline in the variety and
> availability of film, paper and chemistry, what is the attraction of
> chemical capture and processing as compared to digital, especially if
> you're going to use digital output? (Apart from special circumstances,
> that is - if you're going way up the Amazon I do understand that you may
> be concerned about recharging those digital batteries . . . )
>
> Again, not trying to start a fight, just wondering?
>
> Cheers,
> Kip




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]