A T Kott wrote:
It is my understanding that a single 35mm black and white negativeI am way off topic here, but I wanted to make a few of observations about this thread:
1. I have many old and wonderful postcard and 616 size B&W negs of railroad
subjects...and absolutely no way to have them printed other than scanning/digitizing. So
longevity may well mean nothing if you can't use the stuff.
2. The idea expressed on this list several times that a well made digital 8X10 won't
measure up to a traditional wet darkroom print is simply rubbish. I have digital prints from
the Otto Perry collection that are fabulous. It all depends on what you start with and what
you do with it. A poorly made print is a poorly made print, whether wet or digital.
3. A JPG file can be transferred, that is to say moved arouund, without degrading the file. it
cannot be repeatedly resaved as a JPG because the saving process recompresses the file
each time, ultimately degrading the file.
The 'instant gratification' shot is beyond belief. The implication that all of the many
publications produced digitally, including railroad publications, not to mention the train
calendars we buy and the historical society publications that could only be done by
desktop publishing software using digitally produced images, are not the product of
craftsmanship and quality...well, what can I say....
There was a day when folks said a resin kit could never match the quality of an injection