Digital BW, The Print

You are a poet.
>  How about a music analogy? B&W on matte paper is sort of like a string
>  quartet. It can have really smooth tones, is exquisitely detailed, and
>  has sufficient range that you don't feel like you need any more with
>  many scenes. Yet the range of expression is limited. There are only a
>  few instruments, and you lack the brilliance of trumpets or the bottom
>  end of string bass and tuba. But if you operate within the limits of 
> the
>  medium you can do amazing things. After all, there are many people who
>  think the string quartet is the apex of music, and they have a
>  creditable point.
>
>  The reason people want greater Dmax with their B&W prints is because
>  they want more than the limited range of expression available from a
>  string quartet. They accept optical brighteners because the want the
>  brilliance of trumpets. They pursue gloss media for the greater Dmax
>  because they want that solid bottom end of string bass and tuba.
>
>  Really, increasing Dmax is about the only thing we have left to 
> pursue.
>  B&W only communicates though variation in value. The highlight end is
>  already pretty amazing. The only way we can meaningfully increase our
>  visual vocabulary then is to increase Dmax.
>
>  If we could get a Dmax of, say, 2.2 on a smooth matte paper, we'd have
>  all the range we could meaningfully use, and be left to actually use 
> it.
>  And that would be a hard day for many ;-)
>  --
>  Bruce Watson


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]