wet darkroom vs. inkjet

[AJ Edmondson]

I usually stay out of discussions of this type because of the "subjective" nature of of the topic and because there is indeed a need for both approaches but... in this instance I will throw in my "two-cents." Bear in mind that I printed in the traditional darkroom for fifty+ years and I am sure that colors my response. FOR ME - the digital/inkjet approach just doesn't equal the "traditional" results. I would be hard pressed to try to quantify or even accurately describe the difference but the photographs I produce from my Epson 3880 (and 750 scanner) just can't compare to the prints from the darkroom! I decided a couple of years ago that I would "go digital" since - upon retirement - everything was "just for fun." I actually regret the decision and am glad I kept my 4x5 cameras and enlarger. I realize that everyone doesn't share this opinion, and that is fine. It may well be that others don't see the same degree of distinction.

[Gem Singer]

Ken,

The OP stated that he lives in Oakland, CA.

I have seen inkjet prints hanging on gallery walls next to wet prints (not from the same negative, however).

After questioning a few gallery owners, I learned that their average photo buyer doesn't care whether a print is an inkjet print or a darkroom wet print.

The client's main concern is that the print accurately depicts interesting subject matter.

[Steve Sherman]

I usually stay out of discussions of this type because of the "subjective" nature of of the topic and because there is indeed a need for both approaches but... in this instance I will throw in my "two-cents." Bear in mind that I printed in the traditional darkroom for fifty+ years and I am sure that colors my response. FOR ME - the digital/inkjet approach just doesn't equal the "traditional" results. I would be hard pressed to try to quantify or even accurately describe the difference but the photographs I produce from my Epson 3880 (and 750 scanner) just can't compare to the prints from the darkroom! I decided a couple of years ago that I would "go digital" since - upon retirement - everything was "just for fun." I actually regret the decision and am glad I kept my 4x5 cameras and enlarger. I realize that everyone doesn't share this opinion, and that is fine. It may well be that others don't see the same degree of distinction.

Have to agree about the subjective part, so that immediately eliminates that anyone of us will be right or wrong with our respective spin.

Here's mine, when one has the talent / skill to consistently produce prints of the highest technical standard whether it be with the traditional wet process or the digital generated media currently available, why would one abandoned their area of expertise only to climb a new mountain which will certainly take years when the mountain you've already conquered merely provides a means to display and share your thoughts and interests, in short the art you make which is in the end all that matters!

Certainly the road we all started out on was quite bumpy with numerous pot holes and likely seemed like a ride in a horse drawn buggy, in fact that sounds exactly how I feel when I open Photoshop. Conversely, my ride through the wet process is quite streamline with hardly a desire for a new car and most of all is still rewarding.

2 cents