Digital BW, The Print

On 5/20/03 8:40 AM, "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@...> wrote:

>> They only see the cost of the body but they
>> fail to take into account the cost of the film
>> and processing ...
> 
> Rather like digital photographers who only talk about the cost of film and
> processing, and sweep the $10,000 they've spent on gear under the rug.

I believe the expression is penny wise, pound foolish.

Having been at producing images via a computer since the 80's I can safely
say that shooting film and developing and printing it yourself in a dark
room is much, much cheaper in the long run if you don¹t consider time and
you are in it for the long haul.  The $100,000's that I've spent on computer
and digital gear over that time period would have gone a long way for an
excellent darkroom and a whole lot of film, chemicals and equipment.

For my pro work...when I use digital it is always about time...when I use
film it always about quality.  For my art work...I have tried digital (D1
and D1x for about three years now)...but now I use film 90% of the time
because of shooting convenience and flexibility on what I want to do with
the image down the road.

Robert