Digital BW, The Print

Keith writes:

> I suspect the comparison you were refering to
> was on www.luminous-landscape.com where micheal
> has abandoned MF for a 1Ds.

I was referring to the general statement that (35mm) digital compares
favorably to 645.  Generally speaking, (35mm) digital does NOT compare
favorably to 645.

> It also appears to be the case that the 1Ds shows
> up the flaws in all but the best lenses.

So do Provia, Velvia, and Technical Pan.

> BUT - from what I gather, one major problem
> may be that B&W film has a greater dynamic range
> that any colour film or digital sensor.

True, although ideal electronic sensors can have an equal or greater range
(but such sensors are not used in photographic still cameras).  B&W film has
a greater density range, too, since negatives can go from practically opaque
to crystal-clear.

> BUT I also read that inkjet prints can have a
> greater contrast range than the best conventional
> prints (don't flame me  - look at www.piezography.com)

Generally speaking, that is not true.  I don't even think it is true for B&W
ink-jet prints, but I may be wrong.  True B&W photographic prints have
enormous density ranges ... as prints go, that is.

> BUT - if you shoot digital, you can shoot in
> colour and apply filters  (red , yellow etc) in
> post proccessing.

That won't help.  When you record an image in color, you permanently lose
information that would have been recorded by B&W film.  There is no way to
recover that information in post-production, so there is no way to
accurately simulate B&W film by any manipulation of a color image.

> If you use 35mm ,then shooting digital (on a good
> DSLR),and inkjet printing will probably produce
> final prints that are essentially indistingishable
> from conventional prints.

Not true for color; I'm not as sure for B&W, since I've seen some very
excellent B&W ink-jet prints.

> If you shoot MF and have a good scanner (= expensive)
> you will probably get better results (but possibly
> only really visible on BIG prints)

MF superiority is sometimes evident even on small prints, thanks to the
additional depth of modulation provided by MF in the original image.