Digital BW, The Print

At 04:54 PM 11/18/2002 -0000, you wrote:
>Alan,
>
>>>>>
>Some people build an image from countless layers that they diddle with
>endlessly.  I call that digital illustration. Do you want to do that? 
>>>>>
>
>Isn't this a dangerous generalization?  How much diddling with layers
>does it take to cross the line?
>
>I have a 6x7 neg of the St. Marks lighthouse on the Florida panhandle
>coast (taken in 1987) which I was never able to print because the sun
>side of the lighthouse matched the background sky tone almost exactly
>(didn't think to use a filter - duh).  I theoretically could have
>masked it on the neg with magenta dye but it was too small and I never
>seemed to have a knack for brush skills anyway, so I gave up on ever
>getting a good print from it.
>
>In PS I was able to zoom in on a pixel level and find that faint edge
>of the lighthouse.  It took nearly 3 hours but I was able to
>completely separate the background sky from the lighthouse, trees and
>other foreground objects.  Putting it on a separate layer, I was able
>to bring it down in value just below the lighthouse bright side, plus
>add some gradients for edge and corner burning and so on.  After 15
>years I finally got a good print from this neg I've always liked.  
>
>Does this cross the line into digital illustration?  I really like the
>print because it conveys the mood of the original scene.  To me it's a
>miracle after a 15 year wait.  This is the sort of thing that thrills
>me about digi printing.
>
>Any other miracle stories?
>
>Regards, - cj
>

Clayton and David B.

Sorry I seemed overly-critical of those who just can't quit fooling with an
image :-) I'm no purest, fer sure.  You have to judge one picture at a time.
Sometimes manipulations make an image look out-of-joint - non-photographic -
un-natural.  I've seen hideous examples of darkroom manipulation involving
multiple masking with inter-negatives over the years.

I recently sat through a PS presentation where a guy demonstrated his
typical workflow.  After about the twenty or thirtieth layer adjustment the
guy next to me mumbled "Why didn't he just take the %$**## picture in the
first place?"
What counts are results - right?  

Similar to your story, I recently made the delightful discovery of a long
forgotten box of "reject" panoramic  negatives in my attic. They had minor
flaws that made them un-printable - or at least not worth the bother - in
the darkroom. There are some good images I've never printed. Usually the
only problem was long horizontal film scratches. Does a little problem like
that bother us in PS?  I haven't the latest version but am dying to use the
"miracle brush."

AZ

Build a Lookaround!
The Lookaround Book.
http://www.panoramacamera.us