Digital BW, The Print

Scott-

Thanks for those observations.  It occurs to me that you, I and some 
othes are using wet printing as the standard, while many here are 
comparing only digital processes.

Just a few observations.  I find that the midtones too are more open 
in the 2400 prints.  Also that with traditional RC papers, the 
coating was over the image.  With the digital process, the image is 
on top of the coating.  So I can see that the physical aesthetic is 
the issue and this might make me have a look at the semigloss papers, 
which I had not even considered.  I too has a severe aversion for the 
early RC papers.

Do you find viewing illumination levels critical as I earlier 
mentioned.  This might well be the matte process I am using now that 
I think of it.

As for angst about getting out of the darkroom, I couldn't get out 
fast enough!

Thanks,
Walt

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Jones" 
<peanutdogs@h...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" 
> <odets@c...> wrote:
> > Hey--
> > 
> > I'm really knocked out by the quality of the discussion here, and 
> I 
> > wanted to thank Clayton, particularly, and all others for their 
> > responses to my post of last night.
> > 
> > So, I have some other thoughts and observations on the 2400, BW 
> > printing and print evaluation.
> 
> 
> Hey Walt, what a great set of comments and thoughtful observations. 
> Just last night I critically compared R2400 prints on EPSG paper (I 
> like glossier surfaces) to my darkroom silver gelatin prints and 
> invited over a friend who is the head of a photography dept. at a 
> local art school and is also an internationally exhibited fine art 
> photographer. He has a very good eye and knows all the issues. We 
> looked at the prints in halogen, regular incandescent, and daylight 
> lighting and talked about our reactions.
> 
> First of all there was no metamerism, bronzing of any significance, 
> or neutrality issues. I use the ABW portion of the Epson driver and 
> am not using a RIP. I had "toned" my prints at 
2vertical/2horizontal 
> and really could have gone to 3/3 to get away from the really cold 
> neutral point Epson sets.
> 
> Our main discussion revolved around the "look" of these prints. The 
> R2400 prints all looked fabulous and were much better rendered than 
> the darkroom prints (even though I am known as a good printer 
> trained by Sexton). The more precise control of Photoshop made for 
> better dodging and burning as well as contrast and "exposure" 
> control. This was very evident and in general we like the R2400 
> prints better and yes they do have a different look. I just would 
> describe it as better. I think I realized that in general the 
silver 
> prints were so much more affected by the toe and shoulder of the 
> variable contrast paper and the digital prints just seemed more 
open 
> and less compressed especially in the deep shadows and bright 
> highlights.
> 
> On my chosen Epson Premium Semigloss paper the dMax was easily 
equal 
> to my selenium toned prints and very attractive and lush. The 
> only "hangup" was our pre-trained aversion to things "RC". When 
> handling the paper, it had that plastic feel, but the image was 
> still lovely. When drymounted and over matted and the mat was 
> handled, the difference was virtually nil. We discussed how in the 
> color printing world until just recently, all color printing was 
> done on "photo" papers and we had no complaints. We also realized 
> that we are the victims of our previous dislike of RC B&W papers 
> because of their early poor quality and lack of longevity etc.
> 
> So our conclusion was that if it is the image that is important, 
the 
> R2400 prints looked better. Handling a bare print felt "different" 
> than fiber paper, but did not affect the image and when matted up 
> for official display or presentation, the difference was 
essentially 
> none. For me, the use of the EPSG, gives me the dMax that I like, 
> but others may like the mat paper aesthetic more. But I think the 
> point here is that the R2400 prints, at least in my hands, look 
> great.
> 
> I must admit I am going through a bit of angst now, as I think I am 
> making the transition out of my darkroom, since I think I am 
> surpassing my results there. Just some thoughts on this new printer 
> and output that I think is looking fantastic.
> 
> Cheers, Scott