Digital BW, The Print

Don't judge the "maturity of digital photography" by the discussion on this
forum.  By its very nature, this forum is a technically oriented group.  It
is not at all possible to discuss "the juicy human stuff" you allude to
because we can't view people's printed images.  This is a technical forum
largely concerned with the technical aspects of producing a digital print.
It's where people go for advice on equipment and workflow not for an opinion
on the quality of their images.  If such a forum had existed in the days of
Weston et al I doubt that its content would have been much different.
Newcomers would be asking for advice on equipment and darkroom technique,
exposure, processing etc etc.  Participants might even digress into
long-winded discussions of what people did in days gone by, or speculate on
what the future might bring.  People would likely report on the results of
experiments with new equipment, chemicals and substrates.  As they acquired
instruments that quantified important observable elements such as dynamic
range they would likely discuss results in quantitative terms.

Since I've been alive (and I am not THAT old!) we've come a long way.  The
prevalent calculator used by flight engineers for the Apollo missions was
the slide rule.  We now have more computing power in a portable calculator
than was able to be packed into an Apollo spaceship.  Things are never
static.  Photography and print production has never been static.  "Mature"
is an adjective that can only be applied to a particular product.  Mediums
always evolve.  Some just faster than others.

Steve


> From: Djon <westsidemaurice@...>

> 
> We'll know when digital photography is mature when there's less talk
> of workflow and technical matters, more talk like Weston's about the
> juicy human stuff, about which traditional photography has long been
> more concerned (Avedon, Salgado, Capa, HCB etc etc etc).
> 
> Djon