Digital BW, The Print

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Nelson" <peter@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 4:50 AM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Stupid newbie questions


> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Truman Prevatt
> <tprevatt@m...> wrote:
> >
> > The tinkering done in inkjet printing is a drop in
> > the bucket compared to the wet darkroom.
>
> As a veteran darkroom printer, I think there is a key distinction.
> The tinkering you do in a wet darkroom is OPTIONAL for most ordinary
> prints.

Peter,

"Tinkering" is optional in digital printing as well. You can take any
quality computer printer and use the "Black Only" setting to get a nice B&W
print. Some even prefer this method for their quality art prints. With the
Piezo printing system you can also get a good print right out of the box.
Other systems as well.
>
> The difference between a wet darkroom and digital B+W printing is
> that the wet darkroom consists of a basic set of technology
> (darkroom, enlarger, easel, safelight, trays, developer, stop, fix,
> etc) that is universal and it has a standard workflow that you can
> teach anyone in an afternoon.   There are no universal or standard
> tools or processes in digital b+w.   Instead there are a zillion
> competing alternatives, each with their little band of adherents.

A "zillion"? I don't think the alternatives are quite that high and in fact
I wish there were more choices. Actually the workflow is consistent. You
start with a digital image file, either from scanning film or direct
capture, adjust the image in Photoshop and send the file to a digital output
device. The basics are not as complicated as you are making them sound.

As for "little bands of adherents", name me any area of interest where
people don't have loyalty or fanaticism towards a particular brand or
method. Try having a discussion of Leica vs. Nikon vs. Canon! Cold light
enlargers vs. condenser enlargers! Whatever the topic you just have to wade
through that stuff and make your own choices.
>
> We have plenty of people on this very forum who have tried THIS
> digital black and white system or THAT one for YEARS without getting
> satisfactory results.

It took me about two years to get my B&W digital printing to a level that
satisfied me. It took that long for the inkjet ink technology to get where I
was happy with it in terms of hue and for me to learn the Photoshop and
scanning skills necessary to put my vision on paper. I had a head start in
that I had spent many years learning traditional silver printing. Making
good prints is as much or more a process of developing your artistic senses
as it is mastering the technical tools.

I have to point out that there are many people on this forum who are master
digital printers that produce prints second to none. I have a collection of
well over 100 prints from different photographers that are a monument to how
good this medium is.
>
> If you want to compare digital black and white to wet darkroom in
> terms of process and tools, you'd have to compare it to the wet
> darkroom of about 1855, when everything was still being invented and
> photgraphers were still experimenting with different technologies,
> and inventing or discovering processes as they were going along.

I think we have moved past the 1855 level a bit. You need to see some
quality results to really appreciate what can be done. Is it a rapidly
changing medium? You bet! Given that it is computer based and the incredible
advances in that area over the last 25 years this is not surprising.

I am not sure where all your negative comments lead. I have to assume that
you believe digital B&W printing is too hard for the average person or
casual user and should be avoided. To the extent that it will require the
purchase of a computer, software, printers, scanners, etc. and the
investment in time to learn to operate them you are right. Just remember
that learning to use new tools doesn't qualify as "tinkering."

Martin Wesley