Digital BW, The Print

> Pretty impressive, as fanatical as I am about this stuff, I can barely
> approach this. I can't imagine the hours, expensive
> hardware and software, and expertise that go into this system and profiles.

Thank Tyler and Phil,

Very impressive indeed.

Tyler this raises some questions for me. Do you think this is enough to have
you use the Piezo driver more in the future? If not, what in your workflow
do you prefer? Is it mostly for pride in craft, in feeling good knowing
you've built your system on your own, preference for habit; or are there
visible benefits to your workflow, in your prints, to your eyes. I ask, not
to put you on the spot in any way, but to help me sort out where I stand in
the face of this revelation. It gets to what are the important, or crucial,
components of a workflow. Yes: does one like their prints, is the final
arbiter, but what are the components of a good print system? (Please don't
anybody collapse this conversation with the one titled "Technically Perfect
Print". I don't care to discuss what does or doesn't make a print nice
(that's too personal), I want to discuss what makes a workflow or system
nice, which will allow for many different interpretations of an image, or
vision). Things like: long tonal range, discreetly separated tonal values,
pleasing color, ease of use, cost, flexibility, etc. So even for you, the
Piezo driver would seem to be at least equal to your present workflow in
regard to these characteristics. But is it enough to make you reevaluate
your use of it, or is there a component, or an intangible, or a visible
tangible, that I'm not considering, that outweighs some of the benefit of
discretely separated boxes and Zees? Do you know what I mean?

Todd