[rollei_list] Re: OT: B&W Filters in digitial photography
- From: Marc James Small <marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:03:48 -0400
At 09:00 AM 7/14/2010, Douglas Nygren wrote:
>Beyond Photoshop, it's good to have Imageprint. It has profiles for all
>the different papers and allows you to get better results.
>The bad thing is that both PS and IP are expensive. but not as
>expensive as maintaining a Porsche or a horse.
Douglas
That is a flip and bogus answer. I already HAVE
all of the gear for a darkroom from King Concept
processing reels to Kindermann tanks to
APO-Rodagon enlarging lenses for my Beseler 23CII
and a Leitz V-35 as well. I have print
driers. I have trays. I have lots of glass
bottles. I do not need to buy a single thing.
But with digital, I have to reinvest
substantially to obtain slightly poorer prints
than I can produce with the darkroom. To improve
digital print quality, I would have to upgrade my
printer (currently an Epson Stylus Photo R200),
invest in fancy inks and fancy papers, and dump
$1000 or more in software. And I have never been
able to figure out PhotoShop, while darkroom work
comes quite intuitively to me.
PhotoShop works for you, and good for you. But
it is not the answer for everyone, nor is digital.
Marc
msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
