Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >About a year back I met a fine arts photographer. He showed me 30x40s that were shot on 8x10 transparency film. He pointed out the differences between the digital prints and the Ilfochrome prints, saying, "As you can see the chemical prints are still a little better". I would not have noticed the subtilities if he had not pointed them out, and at normal viewing distance for 30x40 prints I doubt anyone else could either. He was only scaning at 1200dpi so his files were only in the 115 megapixel range.
Ciao, Graywolf http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto< the workshop i went to last weekend is the guy doing between 4000dpi and 8000dpi scans of his 4x5 slides. he said was absolutely certain two years ago that digital prints would never equal the quality of wet prints for reproducing his color slides. then he saw what a good drum scanner and Lightjet 5000 output looked like. he said the same things as Galen Rowell did, that people still doing wet prints of color work for exhibition are wedded to loss of detail, loss of saturation, and loss of contrast because that is the way it used to be and always will be with enlargers. as i mentioned in an earlier post, all of the guy's darkroom equipment is for sale and he has no intention ever of using it again. Herb....
