Choosing between wet and digital printing

[Rory_3532]

Recently, I started to do my own B&W processing and contact proofs for 4x5 negatives, using trays and, for the printing, a 7.5 watt frosted lightbulb combined with some elementary dodging and burning. I've come to the conclusion that I want to do my own enlarging and printing. Having watched a very experienced wet printer at work, and having played around with Photoshop, I'm satisfied that both processes involve significant learning curves. Rather than buy equipment for, and try to learn, both, I want to concentrate on one or the other. Hence my question, posed particularly to those who have experience with both processes. If you had to make a choice between the two, for both B&W and Colour, which would you choose, and why? Thanks.

[Ken Lee]

Putting process aside for a moment, perhaps you ought to consider the output of the process: Do you want to make silver prints, platinum prints, inket prints, Lightjet prints, or what ?



Perhaps you ought to find out what advantages and disadavantages of each print type - rather than the processes that get you to them.



Once you know, you can choose the process to get to the goal, rather than the other way around.

[John Cook]

As a student in art school in the 1960's, I almost immediately learned how to make an excellent b&w print. It took about 3/4 box of paper, printing through two or more contrast filters, more burning and dodging than a talkative Navy semaphore signalman, and most of the day in the lab.

Then I opened a business (1970's) when an 8x10 glossy print retailed for less than forty cents.

It was at that point that I came to understand that the “learning curve” for b&w printing involved recognizing or creating decent lighting, understanding how to read an exposure meter, and running a few exposure/development film tests.

Consistency is everything. When you reach the point that all of your negatives are properly exposed and developed images of a well lighted scene, you will be able to turn out twenty to fifty excellent (straight) prints every work day without breaking a sweat.

And all those fancy, secret, time-wasting techniques for saving a crummy negative will become vanity.

Electronic printing will become handy in your golden years when you are in an assisted-living facility where they won’t let you have a wet lab. Or when your walker begins to get in the way. ;0)

[Kevin Quinlan]

Its funny that you say for both, because I was going to suggest doing B&W prints with a traditional wet lab, and doing color printing digitally. Although both can be done digitally, I feel that both look better done chemically. But, printing color 4x5 has a much larger cost in terms of machinery and chemicals(4x5 color head& print processor or normal temperature color chemicals) than b&w does. I would try out b&w traditional darkroom printing first(it can be cheaper to start off than buying photoshop). Then eventually start working with photoshop(we will all need to use it eventually). They will both take practice, but you can teach either one to yourself in a relatively short time (it does take time to get very good at them though). Whichever one you learn first will help you learn the other better. If all of this sounds like too much, find a good lab that you can live with their results (I havn't found one yet).

Kevin Quinlan

[Graeme Wilson]

Another question is what process will you enjoy more ?

Both processes are capable of producing stunning prints.

I spend all day in front of a PC for my job - I'm REALLY looking forward to setting up a wet darkroom when I buy a house - I already do my own B&W processing in a daylight tank - creating the final print is the next step.

After all day managing databases on a PC - mucking around with chemicals sounds like more fun than firing up a PC to load photoshop.

[Bill_1856]

The learning curve for Photoshop 7.0 is daunting. Photoshop Elements, however, is pretty easy. There's probably a cheap course at your local technical school, too.

[Ben Calwell]

John,

You're a hoot. You should write a book. I enjoy reading your posts -- very entertaining.

[Peter Rip]

Ken is certainly correct -- the output drives the process choice.

When I decided to do this (about 3 years ago), I made the choice to shoot film and go digital on the printing. If I only had an interest in B&W, the decision would have been harder. If I had been concerned about the more limited ditial outputs, the decision would have favored darkroom. But the positives in favor of digital were pretty overwhelming, even then:

(1) No set up / chemistry / temperature control, all of which are more of an issue with color. (2) The ability to do my art/craft intermittantly and in a setting more accessible to my family.

The first point is obvious. The second point is less so. The ability to fire up the scanner/PC/Photoshop and "work for a while" and just hit Save, is a great boon for me. Photography is a fairly solitary activity and the darkroom really amplifies that isolation. I like the ability to work on something for a while, get interrupted -- sometimes for hours -- and come back and resume.

On the notion of "learning curve", I think they actually share a lot. There is "what you do" and "how you do it". In many ways the "what you do" is the same -- spotting, burning/dodging, masking of various sorts, filtration, etc. The "how you do it" is specific to the medium. Some of the "how" is in chemistry/light manipulation and some of the "how" is in pixel maniputation.

That all said, in a pure b&w pursuit, I have not yet seen anything from digital rendering that has the tonality of a platinum print. But, when it comes to color, digital has a real edge (IMHO).

[darter]

It is too simplistic to say that the output should drive the choice. As many respondents have made clear, the process can be as meaningful as the final result. Some long-term darkroom workers are overjoyed to switch to digital as they never liked darkroom work. Other individuals get enormous satisfaction from working in the tactile reality of emulsion, paper, and chemistry. I suggest that Peter not rush into the decision, but spend a few weeks making progress in a darkroom. By the end of it, he will know whether he wants to continue on the wet side. I am also not convinced that color digital prints have now, or ever will, surpass the quality of good ilfochrome prints or the newly-revived art of dye-transfer printing.

[Brian Ellis]

While both involve a learning curve, the learning curve for digital is much, much steeper. You can make an acceptable black and white print your first night in a wet darkroom if you've done some stuying beforehand and have even a modicum of talent. Digital is much more difficult. However, IMHO the results are better too in both color and black and white, at least up to the point of maybe 16x20. So I'd suggest digital if there are no other relevant considerations (e.g. cost, what you like to do, what you plan to do with the prints, etc.).

I used a wet darkroom off and on from the time I was about 12 years old. In the last ten years I've taken five darkroom workshops, three from John Sexton, one from Bruce Barnbaum, one from Phil Davis. In other words, I was a very serious, and if I say so myself very good, wet darkroom printer. About two years ago a friend started printing his black and white negatives digitally. The results were stunning. So I switched and now print my black and white negatives (6x7, 4x5, 8x10) digitally almost exclusively. The reason is simple. The results are noticeably better in almost all respects.

Digital is obviously the present and the future of photography. So if you're starting from scratch you might as well start with something that is and will continue to be the basic method of making a photographic print. Wet darkrooms as the mainstream way of printing have disappeared, now they're pretty much an alternative process. Not that there's anything wrong with that, and if you had said you really wanted to learn wet darkroom printing I'd have said go for it. But you indicate no strong personal preference either way and in that case I think digital is the way to go. Just my opinions of course.