Digital BW, The Print

Hi Clayton,

What you say below, is exactly my point, that Austin seems incapable of 
understanding.

There is no question whatsoever that you can get a better print 
digitally and using all
the amazing tools in Photoshop, than you ever could in the darkroom. I 
do it every day!

> My own experience is that during the past year I have been scanning my
> best 4x5 and 6x7 Tri-X negs and making digi prints, and the prints are
> better than I could ever do with the enlarger.  Since I'm using the
> same image source, and it may even be that the scans have less
> information than the negs, I attribute the difference to the ability
> to have precise control over areas of the image that I couldn't ever
> come close to in the darkroom.  

> So it could be the software advantage that allows the practical
> realist to overcome the theoretical limitations.  In other words,
> while the neg may have more information than the digital capture, the
> enlarger doesn't allow us to make use of it as well as software can.

Absolutely true. I suppose if you want to spend days making masks and 
are an extremely skilled
darkroom printer, and don't mind wasting dozens of sheets of paper to 
get a final image, you could
get close to a digital print. But if you can do it in minutes, why do it 
in days?

> Anyway, all of this makes for very interesting reading and I'm
> learning a lot, so I won't be ignoring anyone's posts.  Thanks guys
> for a great forum.

The trouble is, Austin and I and a few others have rehashed this theme 
to death, and I don't see
much benefit of continuing the discussion. Others probably would agree 
with me on this, at least!

Jerry