Digital BW, The Print

> But it's with the 'Fujix' prints that I have a problem, or at the 
very least, a comment.  I our experience the
> Fujix process yields a very poor color print (monochrome or 
otherwise), with a very limited gamut, and I
> consider this to be more photographic than inkjet.

I agree. It's only virtue for scanning is that it is more "continuous 
tone" than a bad injet print. The trick for scanning is to get a 
close to continuous tone as possible. I must add, however, that I 
think all of this is going away. Remember all the debate in the 1980s 
about 9-pin vs 24-pin dot matrix printers? Seems all rather silly now.

> And to take you analogy regarding the inkjet operator one step 
further, I also think the pre press/production
> person at a magazine's end (not to say 'LensWork' specifically) is 
also extremely important, and
> unfortunately, at most publications that is 'the weakest link' 
(again, I am not talking about LensWork...I
> have never seen your publication).

Again, you are right. This is precisely why we print LensWork on a 
sheetfed press rather than a web press and why I personally conduct 
the press checks myself on every issue. As far as I know, we are the 
only photography magazine that prints on a sheetfed press and I know 
from talking with the other publishers that they don't press check. A 
good press operator is worth his/her weight in gold!