Digital BW, The Print

I think it depends on what aspect of photography
you're into. 85% to 90% of my work is copy and
restoration of old photos. I get much better results
from a digital process than I ever did with silver.
Especially with the originals that are so faded out or
have so much silver extrusion that copying with film
just makes a different kind of mess. The digital
prints on Photo rag 308 have almost a three
dimensional look. My clients love it. The biggest
problem I have is overcoming posterization with prints
that originally were high contrast and due to poor
processing the highlights are gone and the shadows are
thick with silver extrusion. But I can play with
curves and usually get around it. If it's beyond help
I can often shoot a copy neg and scan that. No way am
I ever going back to a smelly wet darkroom. 

Evelyn

> --- scott lanes <scott@...> wrote:
> > At 07:58 AM 5/21/2003 -0700,
> paul.roark@...
> > wrote:
> > >I sure would not go back, and I'll bet most of
> the
> > people on this
> > >list have no intention of going back to silver
> > printing for most of their
> > >work.
> > 

> > For the record, i am doing way more digital output
> > than wet darkroom these 
> > days too, but i still think that a well printed
> > silver print still looks 
> > better than a well printed inkjet print. Anyone
> > disagree? Maybe that will 
> > change, but for now......
> > 
> > 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com