Digital BW, The Print

Sunday, November 30, 2003, 6:06:04 PM, you wrote:

TB> AHHHH!!!!  Life is good.  I spent a good part of the day out
TB> in the wind and rain taking pictures of the stormy sea with my 4x5
TB> and real b&w film.  A tourist came up (there are ALWAYS tourists
TB> here) with a puzzled look on his face.  "Not many of your kind of
TB> photographer left", he said.  "It's even worse than that" I said. 
TB> "I'm shooting black and white".  At that point his expression was
TB> something like "Man, YOU ARE NUTS."  He promplty said, "Well, I
TB> guess I better let you get on with your work.  My wife and son are
TB> waiting for me in the car."  He turned and left.

TB> I don't know what the message is here.  But,  LIFE IS GOOD in the large format b&w lane.

TB> Tom Baker

That is a good one.  Someone last week commented when seeing my
Rolleiflex around my neck, "Wow, I'll be that takes good pictures!" I
said, "Yes, it can.  If I don't muck it up!".  Then his wife said, "Is
it a digital?" and I replied, "Well, no, it's from 1953."  In which
she sort of looked at me like I was nuts.  I think she thought I was
being sarcastic.

Here's another good one.  In reply to a query about whether B&W film
and traditional process is dead or dying someone on photo.net just said:

"Just my feeling: If you spend a lot of $$ in top notch equipment - camera,
printer, paper, ink, you will be able to make B&W prints that looks quite
decent. But not up to the real thing. And for sure they will last
less."

So, it takes all types....

-- 
Best regards,
 Richard                            mailto:richard@...