Digital BW, The Print

I've done wet B&W darkroom and all film formats up to
8 x 10" view camera and for the last coupla' years
I've been doing mostly digital capture, scanning of 6
X 7 cm negs, and ink-jet printing. The later using
Roark's insets in the C86 & R220, BO with the 2200,
and most recently Cone's NK7 in the 2200.  There's no
question in my mind that the last stage of printing
the files onto paper is much easier (and BETTER) in
the light-room than it was in the darkroom -
especially now that Epson, Cone, Harrington, and Roark
have done the complex bits and more or less laid that
portion into our laps. 

That being said, the image processing bit (e.g.
Photo-shop) has become MUCH more demanding in every
way I have experienced save toxic fumes and sore feet.
 Much better too - but the available control is
sometimes overwhelmingly daunting. In addition to
having intimate control over practically everything we
also have "buttons" that do the equivalent of <eject
engine> or <light truck(boot) on fire>.

And in the apples vs oranges department: of course
artistic vision - that old eye-brain thing seams to
exist somewhere vaguely parallel to the space-time
continuum but there is nowhere near a one-to-one
correspondence.  It can certainly be honed - and for
some it takes longer and for others shorter, maybe
some are just born with it, and sadly some will never
get it. That, however, is not what I heard the asker
to be asking.

If you have the vision - the tools are available! Be
prepared to spend much time and energy with the
photo-editing software, however.

My $.02 worth.

Michael Vendrell, MD

--- john dean <deanwork2003@...> wrote:

> It isn't any easier than anything else. When
> photography came along
> people thought it could make them instant artists;
> it didn't. When
> digital output came along people thought it would
> make them instantly
> creative art printmakers, it won't anymore than the
> old chemical days.
> You have to put in years like he said to be really
> good, and some
> people don't have what it takes even after many
> years. I know
> photographers who still can't see color well after
> decades of hard
> work, while other students see it very quickly.
> Black and white is
> even more difficult.
> 
> As for high-end printmaking, most people can't do it
> anymore than
> someone who has the cash on hand to buy a great jazz
> guitar will make
> them a concert quality musician. I can tell you
> exactly what you need
> to buy and what you need to read to be a musican,
> but that won't
> produce the art. You many have it or you may not.
> There are no
> shortcuts no matter what the Epson ads tell you.
> There is no manual to
> tell you how to think visually, only technically.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> hogarth@... wrote:
> >
> > CDTobie@... wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > Does anyone really want to tell me that it will
> require years of 
> > > experience and experimentation to get a system
> that will take a good 
> > > B&W image in screen, and make a large, gallery
> quality, archival
> print 
> > > from it?
> > 
> > It depends on how you define "good" and "gallery
> quality" I think. If 
> > you are implying that anyone can rip an image onto
> paper and take it 
> > their local gallery and get it accepted, then yes,
> I'll tell you
> that it 
> > takes years of experience and experimentation to
> get to that stage. In 
> > that, digital printing doesn't differ from
> darkroom printing in any 
> > meaningful way.
> > 
> > It's not the quality of the print that makes them
> say "yes." It's the 
> > quality of the image.
> > 
> > Now, if you have a gallery quality image, you
> still have to get a print 
> > that supports the image. It is not as easy as
> pushing a button. It does 
> > take a fair amount of work, no matter what your
> methodology is. The 
> > reason is that galleries aren't interested in
> "good." They are instead 
> > interested in exceptional. And you aren't going to
> get there without a 
> > fair amount of work to understand the process so
> that you can make
> it do 
> > what you want. And in this too, digital printing
> doesn't differ from 
> > darkroom printing in any meaningful way.
> > --
> > Bruce Watson
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com