----- Original Message ----- From: "Godfrey DiGiorgi" Subject: Re: Interview w/Pentax exec
> > You've invested enough time and effort to learn how to do B&W to > whatever degree satisfies you with film and darkroom, but see no > point to learning how to do it with digital capture and inkjet > printing? That says one thing: > > Don't let the boundaries of your experience and expertise be mistaken > for the limitations of the medium. I spent a considerable amount of my life (almost 35 years) learning black and white. At the same time, my routine is incredibly simple: I expose the film, then I process the film, then I print the film, generally without jumping a bunch of hoops. With digital, I make the exposure, check the histogram for clipping and adjust exposure as needed, then I do a B&W conversion in Photoshop using adjustment layers, tweaking the image until it looks good on the screen, then I print it. What comes off the printer doesn't have the fine tonalities (gradation) that I can get from large format, especially in the shadows, which block up much faster than they do with film. I expect it hs to do with film.s ability to compress more tonalities into the toe of the exposure than the more linear slope of digital capture can manage. I'm not expecting digital to be better, BTW, I realize there are severe limitatons on a 6mp sensor to do this sort of thing. > I've not used one either, but if you're looking for landscape quality > in BIG prints that can compete with 4x5 film, that's where you want > to go. Yes, such cameras are very expensive ... I can't afford it > either. 4x5 film is still a better picture making solution than digital. This may change in the future, but for now, that's just the way it is. When digital grows up, my expecations will change, but for now it is what it is, and it does not compete with sheet film, at least not in my world. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
