Digital BW, The Print

Martin,

I have a state-of-the-art ZBE color enlarger with a Condit pin registration
masking negative carrier that I'll probably never stick another piece of
film into.  Does that convey my opinion?  <g>

I'm having great success making 16x20 digital negatives on Pictorico OHP
film for both silver and platinum printing.  I agree that the first method,
i.e., contact printing is the way to go.  Why introduce optics and alignment
issues where you don't need them?

And you forgot to mention that digital USM is infinitely better and easier
than analog methods.

Ron

  > While there may be loss of sharpness/resolution between the original
  > negative and the scan, there seems to be little loss between scan and
  > final print. My thought is that the total loss in sharpness in the
  > negative-to-scanner-to-printer process may be less than the loss in
  > the negative-enlarger-silver paper process.

  > This would also suggest that if your final output for your digital
  > file will be silver gelatin,  a neg-scan-digital printer-contact neg-
  > silver paper might offer better sharpness over a neg-scan-digital
  > printer-enlarging neg-enlarger-silver paper.

  > Does any of this sound reasonable?

  > Martin




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