naugastyle:
It seems to me, comparing scans on a computer screen to darkroom prints is like comparing bugs and birds: they're different things with different purposes. Computer scans are for "clicking through". Prints are for gazing at and drinking in with the eyes. Once you "print out" the scans and compare them to darkroom prints, the differences become . . . well different.
I, like most of the posters here (duh!) love darkroom work far and away better than slumping in a chair clicking and dragging to produce prints.
But of course if you prefer computation, go for it and no shame! Especially if you are printing a bunch of stuff for friends and family: in my opinion, digital type workflow is perfectly suited for cranking out bunches of more casual shots for loved and liked ones.
Darkroom work, on the other hand, at least for me, is more contemplative, slower, calmer, more surprising, more mysterious. Probably most people choose their process based on the way they can and like to live and on the type of product (snapshot? split toned silver print that'll last 200 years?), not on some arbitrary measure of "image quality." Beware anyone who speaks in those terms, they are out to get you (to buy something)!
The results are definitely different though and it sounds like for the kind of work we are discussing with you, content of the photos is more important than the quality of the print. In which case, you probably would be well-served choosing your process based on convenience and efficiency.
It seems to me, comparing scans on a computer screen to darkroom prints is like comparing bugs and birds: they're different things with different purposes. Computer scans are for "clicking through". Prints are for gazing at and drinking in with the eyes. Once you "print out" the scans and compare them to darkroom prints, the differences become . . . well different.
I, like most of the posters here (duh!) love darkroom work far and away better than slumping in a chair clicking and dragging to produce prints.
But of course if you prefer computation, go for it and no shame! Especially if you are printing a bunch of stuff for friends and family: in my opinion, digital type workflow is perfectly suited for cranking out bunches of more casual shots for loved and liked ones.
Darkroom work, on the other hand, at least for me, is more contemplative, slower, calmer, more surprising, more mysterious. Probably most people choose their process based on the way they can and like to live and on the type of product (snapshot? split toned silver print that'll last 200 years?), not on some arbitrary measure of "image quality." Beware anyone who speaks in those terms, they are out to get you (to buy something)!
The results are definitely different though and it sounds like for the kind of work we are discussing with you, content of the photos is more important than the quality of the print. In which case, you probably would be well-served choosing your process based on convenience and efficiency.
