How much is one giving up in terms of print quality, tonality, dynamic range, etc., abandoning the traditional wet enlarging process and scanning film to files and printing on consumer photo printers?
I know this is a difficult question to answer but would like opinions and facts (urls, references etc.), if available, to provide some enlightenment.
I have been doing the conventional method over forty years and just recently went to digital and don't particularly like what I'm seeing. Are the two processes comparable and, perhaps, I don't have my act together? Any suggestions greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
(Nikon/Canon cameras, lenses, D76/Tx400/Fortepan 200, Minolta DS IV, Epson R300, no enlargements greater than 8.5 x 11, Epson Premium Glossy paper.)
I know this is a difficult question to answer but would like opinions and facts (urls, references etc.), if available, to provide some enlightenment.
I have been doing the conventional method over forty years and just recently went to digital and don't particularly like what I'm seeing. Are the two processes comparable and, perhaps, I don't have my act together? Any suggestions greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
(Nikon/Canon cameras, lenses, D76/Tx400/Fortepan 200, Minolta DS IV, Epson R300, no enlargements greater than 8.5 x 11, Epson Premium Glossy paper.)