Digital BW, The Print

Apologies that this isn't technical, inquisitive, or anything else. 
Just some random comments.

A colleague of mine asked me to photograph her dog.  I figured it would 
be a good learning experience (and I told her that was how I was 
approaching it), and agreed.  It wasn't a "studio" shoot so we were just 
in her backyard, and I shot with Tri-X exposed at 250 (black and white 
dog), using what is roughly an N-2 development time to make sure I 
didn't lose the highlights.

I scanned with my Nikon Coolscan IV ("only" 2900 dpi) with Vuescan, 
edited in 16bit mode in Photoshop, printed onto Ilford Galerie Smooth 
Pearl (that's what my colleage wanted, even with the caveats on 
longevity) with my 1280 with UT2 inks.  The print looked good with my 
5x7 proof, but I was worried about going all the way to 11x14 (requested 
size) from my "lowly" scanner.

The full-size print is AMAZING.  Tones are incredible, rich, deep blacks 
and detailed highlights.  No dots whatsoever, and the grain is actually 
really, really impressive, considering Tri-X isn't known for being low 
grain.  And it is razor sharp (of course, that's more lens than anything 
else).

Sorry for the lond lead-in but...my point is that this is one of the 
first times when I've done a workflow from shoot>develop>scan>edit>print 
from start to finish with a particular quality in mind, and absolutely 
achieved that goal with the tools available.  Of course, the inkset and 
curves and everything plays a large part in the process.

I am always telling people that digital b&w is different, but just as 
good.  I'm not sure I even need to say that anymore - anyone can see 
that the technology is _impressive_.  Wow.

anyway.  sorry if I'm wasting an offensive amount of bandwidth.
allan

-- 
Technical Projects Specialist
Academic Computing
Stanford University
v - (650) 996-0546
f - (650) 725-4685