I have seen cyanotype and platinum/paladium prints, they're even better
if the source image is exceptional, such as an 4x5 or 8x10 plate.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Jan 19, 2006, at 11:17 AM, William Robb wrote:
In the words of the presenter, "Who cares about taking pictures on
film? I always hated carrying 40 pounds of camera and junk into
the field ... now I can carry my digital camera, or my film
camera, and have all the advantages they present, make my contact
negatives up to any size I want, and get the kind of image
qualities and durability I want."
He forgot to mention his work is degraded to the resolution and
detail capturing ability of small format digital or film, not large
format film.
Not worth the theoretical debate ...
Looking at his 4x5 and 8x10 work in platinum/palladium contact prints
and comparing it to the work he obtained with a Canon 10D or 35mm,
there is no difference to be seen. All of it is beautiful.
Personally, I wonder what sort of image qualities he wants. If small
format film or digital makes him happy, he would probably be happy
with a wide body Epson, and could forget all about the darkroom.
You have to see cyanotype and platinum/palladium prints. You cannot
reproduce the textural qualities of these prints with an inkjet print
at all. The differences are not just tonal qualities or resolving
power ...
Godfrey
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
