Digital BW, The Print

Bill,

Thanks for the reply, it cleared up some of the questions.  However
there are still some unconnected dots, so let me try again, maybe I
can ask it better (I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but just
want to resolve this question).

>The defining factor, in my opinion, is the decision about what 
>level of control the photographer makes...
>You simply cannot exercise the same level of control over the
>printing process with an OEM driver that is made possible by a
>carefully calibrated/profiled rip-driven workflow. 

You have clarified that your central point is about control, but it
did not really address my question about how your point differs from
or relates to Tyler's post.  Tyler's main emphasis was on the
rendering of fine detail which he attributed to the number of grays
and the RGB driver's lack of ability to distribute the dots well
enough.  He used the analogy of a contact print to describe the
difference he was seeing, and this is what led my thinking to the film
format question.

Even in a relatively crude BO print there is a huge difference in
prints from 4x5 and 35mm negs.  It is pretty much just as we were used
to seeing in darkroom prints - nothing has changed in that regard.  I
see the same difference in my K3 prints, and my conclusion is that
regardless of what printing system is used, image size is always a
major factor.  

Tyler's example blowups show what happens on a pretty microscopic
level.  There is a large amount of fine detail in that tiny piece of
print, which he said was 6.5x9 from a 5x7 neg - very little
magnification and essentially a contact print.  Seems to me that if
the big difference is the ability to render detail at that level, with
a small image source requiring a large degree of magnification there
may not be much detail at that level to be rendered.  This was the
essence of my question whether Tyler-like (or contact print-like)
results are closely tied to using large format images.

Your reply: "...the main difference between a workflow using large
format film originals, versus 35mm, is aesthetic" did not seem to
address this.  Isn't the aesthetic part of it directly a result of the
technical realities?  

This brings me back to your emphasis on control.  Seems like you are
attributing the difference in those prints to something different than
what Tyler is saying.  The issue of control seems to me more the realm
of getting open shadows, desired contrast, transitions between zones,
tone distribution, etc.

The reason I'm digging at this is I'm trying to get a handle on some
slippery concepts that will help people who are just getting started.
If the difference in Tyler's examples can be expected when using a
5x7 camera, what difference can be expected for someone using 35mm or
645?  Seems to me it ought to be correspondingly smaller, control
issues aside.  Would you agree?

In the film world we could make some definitive statements: If you
want contact print quality you have to use a large format camera. 
Every format down from there has it's corresponding compromise in the
print.  Seems to me that the same rule applies here.  Is it fair to
suggest that Tyler-like prints can be made from 35mm negs?

I'm not contesting what Tyler said nor what you said, but am just
trying to sort out what seems like overlapping and confusing ideas.  I
pretty regularly get emails from people who are confused and/or
discouraged by what they read in this forum.  I'm constantly learning
like everyone else and am always trying to clarify, sort out and
understand the various issues.  Thanks very much.


Regards,
Clayton

Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm