Digital BW, The Print

Carolyn, you needn't be so defensive. 

You asserted a real interest in images. You actually spoke of "the
look of the prints."  That's heartening and it's unusual on digital
forums. 

Very few posts on this or other digital photo forums talk about
images, they talk about gizmos, acquisition, technical distress and 
confusion. Browse the posts: you may or may not agree, it's not
important. Your deep roots in digital technology are a huge advantage
for you. 

Other fine photographers find digital technology alienating, pure
trouble. That's one reason I think it's important sometimes to
deemphasize the gizmo focus: Many the best film shooters have chosen
to avoid digital weirdness and simply stick with the analog technology
they rode to success. There are plenty of analogies in music.

To my way of thinking, photography (and music) has to do with
instants, real time. Printmaking, like recording, has to do with
labors after the fact. They may be equal, but it's uncommon for great
photography, like great music, to involve great labors after that
decisive moment. Just for a moment, think about the type of music that
involves the latest technology and the most post processing.

John


 has really changed the
> look of the prints.
> 
> Carolyn