Digital BW, The Print

Dear Mr. ALan,
All of waht you write is true. I to remeber those days of teadous work in the dark room to get a perfect print. it all
starts from the lens quality to the negative, the print is the final vision. It has to be right. So your tools in the dark room
have to be perfect. Then your chemicals have to be right. What type of developer (from film to paper) to use to get 
your final image. These steps are still conducted in the digital age. It still takes a good hour to get a great print. You still
do test to get what you really what. Would'nt it be great if we could do teststrips for exposure test on the desktop printer???
May be not.
So i agree with dedication of one printer for each. the results are consistant. But what of the 2200? can you get good 
results from exchanging inks and paper? Or would you dedicate that printer for b/w and say a 1280 for color?
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Alan Zinn 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 5:29 PM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Again Double standards


  At 08:33 AM 12/9/03 -0500, you wrote:
  >Hi all,
  >
  >As a full time shooter and part time magazine writer, tech. editor, I put
  >forth the proposition of a double standard for analog vs. digital vs. hybrid
  >photograpy a while back. However, since it showed up under the title "BW vs.
  >Color," no one ever responded to my original PREMISE, even though it 
  >resulted in
  >over 100 "not quite what I had in mind" responses.
  >
  >Back in the darkroom days (long time for me as an adopter of digital output
  >in 1986), we had a color enlarger and a B&W enlarger. We used color paper for
  >color prints and B&W paper for  B&W prints. We used fiber based paper for the
  >"good prints" and high gloss RC paper for publication (which ended up in the
  >round file after being turned to half toned dots).
  >
  >To produce, say, up to 16x20 prints, a color darkroom with a 3-lens turret
  >(for all 3 formats) on a long column enlarger and analyser was about $5,000.
  >Throw in some plumbing and an EP-2/RA-$ processor, and you could make the 
  >total
  >about 20 grand. Zone VI darkroom equipment (cold head, regulator, precision
  >digital enlarger timer, temperature compensated timer for developer, archival
  >washer for fiber prints, etc.) could be had for a few grand on top of any 4x5
  >used condenser enlarger. Since 80's pricing would have to be doubled for 
  >these
  >inflated times, we could easily extrapolate the numbers to over $40,000 in 
  >2003
  >money.
  >
  >Now it seems we are trying to get $400 plastic throwaway printers to do this
  >the cheapest way possible with colored inks and bitch about metamerism issues
  >because we are not serious enough to dedicate one for color and one for B&W.
  >
  >In the past, I always reserved fine art B&W for personal work and the Color
  >to earn a living with. That has not changed.
  >
  >But now, I celebrate the incredibly AFFORDABLE way we can all create prints
  >that are better than ever. Yes, I put my money where my mouth is. I'm 
  >amazed at
  >how far inkjet has come in the 12 years since I got the first large format
  >inkjet printer (8-bit Encad in 1991). It could only do 256 colors, but anyone
  >could see that within a short time we would print photos with this 
  >technolory. I
  >never imagined the cost would go from 11 grand to less than $100 for desktop
  >units...............anyway, I digress.
  >
  >What is wrong with dedicating more than one printer to a specific task?
  >
  >These things are cheap, people. Get one or two with color dyes, one or two
  >with 3rd party pigments (one gloss and one matte black), and do the same 
  >with B&
  >W printers.
  >
  >I know most of you can't justify "printers by the dozen," or the really big
  >ones, like some pros can, but for gosh sakes, get a printer dedicated 
  >solely to
  >B&W and quit trying to do it with color
  >inks................................digital double standard, indeed!!
  >
  >Intelligent comments invited (no flames please).
  >
  >Claude Jodoin
  >Tech. Editor
  >Rangefinder Publications.
  >
  >
  >

  Claude,

    I agree that we really have very little to squawk about now. We gripe 
  about the lack of QC on ink jet across the board but forget that photo 
  printing papers were less than consistent too. And remember what crap RC 
  was when it first came out?  Color labs had to be fine-tuned for each lot 
  number of film and paper.  Maybe there should be "pro" grades of ink jet 
  gear - somebody like the late Fred Picker to tune printers and re-package 
  consumables for a premium.  If you compare the wastage of  an old amateur 
  color dark room with OEM ink jet printing, ink jet looks cheap.

  AZ



  Build a Lookaround!
  The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed.
  NOW SHIPPING
  http://www.panoramacamera.us




        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
  - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
  - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

  BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.


  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]