I'll put to you the same challenge I put to Cotty: show me the best DSLR-Photoshop B&W you've done, then we'll talk. If you've got something up on a web site, let's see it, but real prints speak the loudest and the clearest.
To say that you're making the best B&W you've ever done means little to anyone but you without knowing the results you were getting before. It may be that what you're doing now IS better than what you were doing , but it would be interesting to see (not hear about) how that compares to some truly fine B&W silver-based prints on good quality fiber-based paper. "Facile" generally doesn't = quality, nor do higher production rates. They usually mean compromised quality. Shel the Skeptic > [Original Message] > From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Over the past 2-3 years, I've moved all my photography to > digital cameras. Reason: I get better quality this way, and can > produce more work > > 80% of my photography is B&W. I'm printing the best B&W I've > ever done now. It is much much more facile to render B&W in > Photoshop than in the darkroom.
