digital vs traditional photography

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Simple - he took them with a camera. It's not that hard to figure out

Well, apparently not that simple. Remember, the "final image is what matters." Something you guys keep repeating incessantly. So what do you care how the "final image" was made? If an ink jet poster is a photograph then it does not mater how the poster was made...no? Whether he used a camera or not it does not matter....."the final image is what counts".....

I dont know why you seem to be stuck in the photograph thing, but it seem you did not get the point.

[Paddy Quinn]

"I am now putting traditonal photographic paper in a Lambda lazer exposing unit and exposing the paper from digital files worked on in PS or straight from Phase backs, then processing the paper in traditional methods. I am currently using fibre base paper(agfa classic) cibachrome(cps) and any of the RA4(chrstal archive,endura , metal). The * Deveere unit* mentioned is a LED device that fits on a 4x5 deveere enlarger and creates an virtual projected negative from a digital file. "

I ran some tests last year witha lab that also used a Lambda to trad B&W paper as well as with the DeVere.

The Lambda unfortunately suffers from a well known slight softenss or lack of resolution compared to say the Chromira (somehwat different technologies) and this seems to show up more on fibre type papers than on RC colour for some reason.

We found the Lambda prints up to about 20x24 showed this slight softenss quite noticably compared to prints from the same files on an Epson 9600 and also the DeVere(as well as a traditional enlargement). Up to about 20x24 the DeVere and the traditional enlargement gave about the best and comparable results. Over 20x24 the problems with the Lambda weren't such an issue.

[Ellis Vener]

And now for something completely different:

http://www.darrenbarefoot.com/hall/index.html

[David Luttmann]

Paddy,

I found that the Lightjet output was sharper than that of Chromiras. However, Lightjet Vs Inkjet using similar finishes was not much of an issue for me. If I need a really big print, I sent it to a lightjet via FTP. Anything 24x30 and smaller, I output to my 7600.

I haven't had any experience with the DeVere units so I can't comment there.

Regards,

[Paul Butzi]

Paddy, can you comment on the smoothness of tone achieved with the various digital-onto-fibrebase solutions like the Lamda, the Devere LED head, and the Chromira?

[David Luttmann]

Paul,

The tonal smoothness of the Chromira and Lightjet are superb. I send some of my work to a lab in Vancouver that uses the Lightjet system and Fuji Crystal Archive and the results with slightly warmtoned B&W in RGB is something I am always be happy with.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

If you don't see a difference between capturing an image with a camera of any type and drawing an image on a computer (or paper) than I'm at a loss for your comprehension abilities

And you consider yourself the "master" logician huh? You call an image scanned from a negative and drawn on a paper with a machine a "photograph" and then turn around and say that the same process that is just made with bits an pieces of other photographs and drawn on paper with the same machine not a photograph.....wow, amazing piece of logic.

S tell me, this chromira stuff you use, you have pic to show us? You must have a digital file somehwere we can see....

[Paddy Quinn]

Dave,

I was going to say I was talking about B&W not color (I have color prints done via Chromira usually) then I saw your second post. I really haven't found B&W RGB prints on RC via the Chromira or Lighjet to be satisfactory. I just don't quite the look, and (unless it's on the B&W for colour processes paper) I can nearly always detect a slight colour cast.

I quite like inkjet output to watercolor type papers - epson ultrasmooth, Arches Infinity or Photo Rag, but again, prefer it if it is done with quad type inks. I am still not entirely happy with the results printing via the Ultrachrome Epson inkset for example - even with toned prints or those printed througn a RIP there is still nearly always some metamerism under different lighting that is noticable. And even with Quad inks, it's still not quite yet there for me (I haven't tried the new Epson Inks/Printers yet).

The DeVere seems pretty good and is my favourite right now - and of course you can do fibre or RC. It depends a lot on the scan/original file and the operator though. Mine were actually done with friends at DeVere so they knew what they were doing - I've been involved with them since the CIA used to buy their enlargers for printing up hi-level recon photos (they used to have a arehouse space in Virginia with different DeVere enlargers in them. When something went wrong with one a Langley and they couldn't fix it we would fly out a tech from N Devon in the UK and he would show the CIA tech on the "demo" set up what to do, then he would go back to Langley and fix it... which always seemed a bizarre way of doing things).

The DeVere does have a bit of a "look" of its own that's hard to describe, but imo it's the closest to a trad enlargement

[Gene Crumpler]

Moderater

Please put on a filter or spam blocker, etc, to kill these digital vs silver debates PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[David Luttmann]

Paddy,

I'm probably not noticing the colorcast you refer to as pretty much all of the Lightjet work I do for B&W is either sepia or platinum toned. I haven't done any standard B&W on the Chromira or Lightjet. All that goes thru my 7600 with Hahnemuhle paper, Moab, or even Ilford. My B&W inkjet work has been primarily carbon pigment as of late....although I'm open to trying new inks.

I'll have to try the Devere setup sometime to see how it compares to LJ or Chromira. I find myself with little time to experiment as the workflow of printing our portrait & wedding photos as well as enlargements for a number of other photographers means that I try not to muck around with the setup too much.

Where do you send your DeVere work to?

Regards,