PhotoRoy6@xxxxxxx writes: > In a message dated 11/9/2005 11:40:55 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > dd-b@xxxxxxxx writes: > >> Oh, it is, tremendously. Have you ever done color printing in a >> darkroom? Made contrast masks? > > The ideal solution (IMHO) is to shoot slides and scan them. Get the > benefits of both worlds. Film has a better color gamut and you get > away from the fumes and time consumption of lab work. I did some of that (well, had them scanned) when I was first edging into digital back in 1995 or some such. My initial motivation was to display some of my photos on the web. Then I started discovering the power of digital editing, and then inkjet printing started to take off, and I gave up any idea of putting a darkroom into the house. I far prefer to scan negatives, though, especially with desktop equipment (I now have a Nikon LS-5000, which replaced my first film scanner, an LS-2000). Slide densities go a lot higher, which is one of the weaker areas in desktop film scanners. I never had fume problems in the darkroom (mostly B&W, but those are actually fumier in some ways), probably because of some care in ventilation, and a lack of allergies to anything involved. I really like being able to do *little* bits of printing work -- not having to set up chemistry and clean up afterwards and wash and dry prints (most of my darkroom work was B&W). That made it a big enough deal that it was only worth doing when several hours were available. Now I can poke at something for just a few minutes when I think of it. -- David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
