jim_chinn1

Maybe 40 years from now, if I am still around, I will read an

article by a master of digital processes about how he has discovered

how a print made on paper coated with silver halide or paltinum

and "wet processed" has a depth, lustre, luminosity and feel that can

not be achieved through current state of the art methods.

Jonathan,

<p>

Thanks for pointing out the "darkside" of the technology. Everything

you say is true. besides the costs in dollars, one also has to

decide the cost in time. I may spend an ungodly amount of time in

the darkroom trying to get a print just right, but it is still time

spent on the image. There is very little that can go wrong with my

current wet set up that can not be quickly replaced or repaired by

myself. I can see that for photographers like myself who create

images not as a career but as a personal endeavor, on somewhat

limited funds and creative scheduling, the technology might sour the

great joy I find now.

<p>

But on the other hand there is a mountan of ektachrome and kodachrome

slide boxes from 35mm sitting around here, maybe i will just get a

cheapee scanner, basic photoshop, low end Epson printer. Wait maybe

a better printer to start, no better get a high quality scanner, no

aughghgh, were is the asprin bottle! anyway thanks for the

discussion, my 5 yr old wants me to "help her" make some prints from

some 8x10s I made of here most recent block architecture.

Good Shooting

Thanks for the discussion. Since I brought up the issues i would

like to clarify where stand. i will probably migrate to digital but

not untill I can afford to do it with the quality equal to the best

silver and platinum prints I have seen. But "cost to quality ratio"

is going to have to approach that of Large Format when I started.

What i mean by that is if the only way to get the quality results

that I wanted required I buy a $3000 camera, a pair of new lenses for

$3000 and a variable contrast head 4x5 enlarger for $3000 i would

still be playing around exclusively with 35mm. But I was able to

accumulate the equivalent in used gear for about $2500 to start out.

Im not suggesting we will be buying used scanners and printers, but

there will be a time when the bottom rungs of the technology will

provide the tools to produce the prints we want at comparable costs

to the wet darkroom. As far as the comment about some people just

not wanting to spend the effort in the darkroom, I love the time I

spend there, but with two small children and trying to balance

photography, work and family, it becomes difficult to find more than

a few hours a week get in there. It just seems very appealing that

once you have processed and scanned the neg, you can spend your time

creating the print, not mixing chemicals, testing chemicals, throwing

out used chemicals, testing papers, trying to make identical prints

with complicated printing designs etc etc.

I have recently read the article in the latest edition of View Camera by George DeWolfe, "Piezography Quadtone Printmaking and the Future of Black-and-White Photography: One Man's View". I will ask a couple of questions based on the assumption that most people who contribute to this forum have read or will read the above mentioned article.

<p>

1. Mr. DeWolfe states that, "the combination of scanned high quality black-and-white negatives and prints, a dependable driver, a high resolution printer driver, the Piezography BW Quadtone Inkset and archival papers have enabled us to produce prints from an inkjet printer of higher quality than we traditionaly produced with silver and platinum media". I have only seen such prints reproduced in magazines. Has anyone on this forum seen such prints and if so, give an objective comparison to silver or platinum.

2. I am fairly literate about the components used in his specific

workflow to output a print. My question to anyone who has experience with the hardware and software, what is the cost for these components minus the computer?

I have been working with 4x5 and 8x10 for several years and while I enjoy the darkroom, I have no qualms about migrating to just shooting and processing film and going digital for prints. I know these issues have been discussed before, but in light of this article and recent articles about Huntington Witherill using medium format negs and digitally "remastering" them into 16x20 contact negs maybe there is some fresh insight from the group that will help me and others to decide if and when to make the jump.

Thanks for any and all responses.

Chad,

<p>

Making your own sink out of plywood and fiberglass is fairly easy but

time consuming. i have seen plans in a couple of DIY darkroom books

and someone else may be able to direct you to plans on the web. I

don't know where you are moving to but check sheetmetal fabricators

in your area. They probably have experience working with SS and

could fabricate your sink for less then retailers previously

discussed. At the very least you would probably save on shipping

costs and have exactly the dimensions you need. I saved about $200 on

an 8'x3' sink and had the drains, backsplash height and cutouts for

faucets exactly where i wanted them.

<p>

Enjoy the new facilities!

James Chinn