"Stacey" wrote in message
...
David J. Littleboy wrote:


"Stacey" wrote:
David J. Littleboy wrote:

And then you'll by a Nikon 8000 or 9000, since that's the only way
you
can
get the detail off the slides.

If you shoot slide film to scan digitally. You and a few others assume
because y'all do this, it's the only way to process film.

We don't assume anything, we know that it's the best way to print color
film.


Your opinion.. When was the last time you printed color film in your home
darkroom? As I recall you didn't know what RA-4 even means! Doesn't sound
like to me you have much experience with wet darkroom work, not enough to
make such a blanket statement.

Just because your digital darkroom seems -easier- to you, doesn't mean the
results are better.

It's really no contest, Stacey. There's a reason why wet labs are all
switching to digital. You can't beat it for spotting, color corrections, and
tone mainipulations, let alone compositing and other garbage effects. The
valid reason for concern is longevity, although even RA3 and 'Chromes are
notoriously short lived. Even that isn't worthy of debate; we only have to
wait ten years to see for ourselves.

All that used darkroom equipment is coming from somewhere, and it's not
Uncle Joe deciding to finally clean out his garage. Wet labs are going
digital, or going under. I picked up an Omega D5 for next to nothing. Only
hobbyists have the time to make wet prints these days.