Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:
....
> For years photographers thought of the chrome (positive transparency,  
> on a backlit light table) as the standard; and it was certainly  
> unmatchable in any other format at the time, so saying "here is my  
> glorious work, it will look lousy when you make photo prints of it, or  
> send it to press" was a common photographer's viewpoint.
...

> ...For others, its the final print on  
> paper, but thats mostly the printmakers...

As someone with feet in both the commercial photography world, and the fine art photography world, I'd redefine those categories. 
Commercial shooters, from large format ad work to 35mm Nat Geo work, glorified the transparency, and were generally disappointed with it's representation on paper and the compromises required to get it there.

But in the fine art photography community I was exposed to, color or B&W, you weren't done until you had a successfull print. From Eugene Smith to Eggleston, Gibson to Sommer, the print is the photograph. It's not just a printmaker concern.

This is not to suggest that all artists should follow this path, or that all fine art photographers have or should have, certainly there are many fascinating options.
For me, from the beginning, I did not have a photograph until a print that spoke was in physical existence. I was exposed to this by several masters of photography early on, long before I was a "printmaker". 
Tyler
http://www.custom-digital.com/