For a "snapper" digital is "better in every way." Digital still has a hard time with many of the minute details which make film and hand printing beautiful. I've shot a d1x and d100 since they came out, along with the Hassleblad H1 system and leaf backs on Sinars. All of these formats are good for for certain things. Still, I don't think digital is a replacement for film or hand printing. Processes which are natural and left, at least some what, to the possibility of slight error are always going to have appeal. I can not tell you how many times, I've made a mistake processing or printing with traditional methods only to think---wow look at that, and then say to myself, "can I do it again." I seem to find, this occurs much less frequently with digital work, and when it does---it doesn't have near the same punch. There are two kinds of fools: One says, "This is old therefore it is good." The other one says, "This is new therefore it is better." - William R. Inge My humble regards, Blake Pearson Birmingham, AL On Jun 10, 2005, at 9:13 AM, Qkano wrote:
|