Patrick, if you don't know the dramatic distinction between viewing real REAL PRINTS, especially subtle ones, and the VERY BEST the web is capable of even today, then maybe you need to invest in a white cane. Yes, the web has improved a lot, but due to it, the "standard" and expectation of what people find acceptable and defining just keeps sinking lower and lower. I've already got current digital tools and an especially deluxe copy stand setup to do web image presentation in an up to date fashion. Scanning directly from negs or chromes for sake of web image presentation in an entirely different ballgame. I've turned down free drum scanners because that's NOT the way I want to go.
As a far as I'm concerned, a photograph is never really completed until its personally printed, precisely cropped, and even mounted by me, my own specific way. Anything else is half-baked. I AM a printmaker. That IS the name of the game. With a helluva lot of work and expense, fine book presentation is potentially a distant second option. The web is still way way off behind the left field fence out in the cattle pasture, as far as I'm concerned.
But like I already stated, web presentation is a very low priority at the moment. What is important it to keep making ACTUAL prints themselves, while I still can, and getting them properly mounted. That's what will continue to define the specific look I want, and not any so-so digital substitute. If you can't accept that, then take up the debate over on the hybrid section.
People mocking me? - get real. That is an insult. Do you think I was born yesterday, and have only been doing this for six months? I had my own server, custom software, plus dedicated programming staff at my day job before I retired. Besides the quality advantages to real optical printing and darkroom workflow, do you really think that, after all of that, I'd want to spend a lot of time now fiddling with imagery sitting on my butt and punching buttons? My fingers were crippled and almost unusable with carpal tunnel syndrome when I retired; now they're almost completely normal again.
Odd this may seem, but I'm with Drew on some of this, and I'll put my dental drill away (hopefully for good) and try to comment accordingly.
All too often we tend to forget that it's better to catch bees with honey than vinegar. At times I'm as guilty of using the latter as anyone else, so I know.
Drew, let me say it's good your carpal tunnel syndrome mostly went away when you wisely gave up the things that were causing and/or aggravating it. It will all pass in time. My partner has had periods of this and tells me it's most unpleasant.
Drew's stance on photographs and the web may seem worthy of criticism to some (I like to think he is "outspoken" which is certainly his own unique style), but I think the gist of what he tried to say was that he doesn't rely on back-pats from other photographers for affirmation or the value to his self-esteem of his imagery. He has a more, well, "mature" viewpoint on his past and current photography and he seems to find enough satisfaction in making good film negatives and then good paper prints. I do too. So, well and good.
I also have never posted images for public viewing. In the past I've had 'closed' web sites for clients to view my stock architectural images which they bought for publication. I've sold hundreds of images in my time and seeing them in print, mostly in quality books on architecture, was enough for me, as was spending the money I made, for the most part on good equipment and if any was left over, travel to new destinations to again make more images. So my little merry-go-round went. Sadly, it stopped revolving last year due to the Covid crisis, but I have to say it had been turning more and more slowly from about 2014-2015, when my particular stock photo markets went into decline. But this is not what I set out to say, so enough of all that.
I believe we older photographers tend to look to our images with different viewpoints. Not for us the instant adulation so many nowadays crave from the social web sites. I know several dozen (younger) photographers. They call themselves "artists" (but rarely seem to do any finished work) and post images on such sites as Facebook etc etc, after which they contact everyone on their friends/social lists (some have thousands on names on these) to solicit "small pats on the back", as my partner calls it. Often as not their work is good, but not inspiring. I like to think they don't much care - altho' a part of me knows they do, often entirely too much, going by the angst they express when someone comments less than positively on what they have posted.
I also do not post online only for the adoration/adulation/criticism/ego gratification of it. Much of this because I still shoot a fair bit of film, I dislike scanning (= a pain in the pooter), and at my age time in the darkroom eats up enough of what is left of my life that I prefer to limit it to a minimum and prioritise other good things. Last week I did 15 rolls of B&W film I had hoarded since early 2020. Setting up my Jobo, mixing the chems, warming the bath, loading, and then the damn scanning, about 40 minutes for each 35mm roll to get the scan quality I consider to be barely acceptable). At some time in the future I'll make about a dozen prints for framing and hanging. Which will be it for me. I enjoy these processes (well, most of them), but it's still such a lot of work...
I suspect Drew (and to an extent me too) doesn't greatly care for public adulation of his work, and gets entirely enough pleasure out of doing it to please himself. I'm the same, and so I could not agree more.
In spite of our past differences, I have to say he often has positive and helpful things to say about photography. He seems to know his craft and he comes across as being secure within himself. He can be irritating at times, but doesn't this apply to many of us of the same 'vintage', who've passed the Use By Date (again, from my partner) of threescoreandten. Call me ageist (as someone did in this thread). I say, phooey to that!! I'm old enough to be as ageist as I want. PC be darned. Flush it.
I agree with him that even a decade ago, posting images on the web was in many ways primitive (or to put it diplomatically, "in its infancy") and one had to do a lot of post-production work to get acceptable images online. I put up with it until my sale markets declined (for purely external reasons, not my images) I cut back on my web posting six years ago and I've not at all missed the time and effort I had to put into it. The money I made from it, well, nice, but over the years there was less of it while the workload stayed the same, and to me at that/this time in my life, it just wasn't/isn't worth the effort. I now prefer to print and hang my work at home, give it to family and friends, put it in small books. My latest creative effort is - wait for it - a photo album of our long-departed cats back to the '70s. Ha!
Now can we all go back to being grown-ups with fewer tactless criticisms and name-calling and put-downs (I'm as guilty of all of these as the rest) and to the original point of this thread. How goes the OP in his quest for better skies in his negatives? We are all awaiting your latest input, much like the cat that ate cheese to peer down the mouse hole - with baited breath. Ouch!!
PS I enjoyed Bras S's excellent photos (#94) and his humorous 'take' on all this. Greatly appreciated. My last (= one and only) visit to Sonora was more than forty years ago. I wonder where those Kodakchromes are...