That was a problem in the area way before digital came along. In Ann Arbor I was able to get very good prints made at ridiculous prices because there was a photographer who was also a truly great color printer. He was also tired of darkroom work, thus the high prices ($25/8x10 in 1982-85). I was only willing to pay that for portfolio prints, of course. To me the most amazing thing about his work was his color memory, he could color match a print of something he had seen himself several years before to the subject.

graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------




Paul Stenquist wrote:
I believe that somewhere in the world there may be some enlargers and some operators who can make optical prints from 35mm negatives that are superior to a good inkjet print from a 6 megapixel image. But even the work of the best pro lab in this area isn't up to snuff. I know I can print BW from 6x7 with my Schneider Compuron-S that is superior to BW from my digital. However 35mm printed with my Nikon 50/2.8 is merely comparable, although perhaps more classic because of the grain and superior grayscale. However, I can't get a stunning color optical print anywhere around here, and Detroit is a city of big studios and top-dollar pros. Of course they all shoot digital now, so there's really no need for a good optical lab support system.

Yes, I said it was a plastic toy. I was wrong.

On Dec 14, 2004, at 12:02 AM, William Robb wrote:


----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Fw: The film is dead



The fair comparison is to compare a high quality optical print to
digital.
Do that, and yer 6 megapixie dslr starts to look like cheap junk.


Not really. But you can believe that if you want.


You have really come to like the little plastic toy haven't you?

The guy I share studio space with is a very good custom printer.
It is amazing what he can pull from a 35mm negative.

Paul, I wouldn't say it if I had any reason to doubt it.

William Robb






Reply via email to