Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/06

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Debate on traditional vs. digital printing
From: RBedw51767@aol.com
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 13:21:39 EST

Paschal:

We are at similar levels of interest.   I have the darkroom and I am
interested in expanding my digital functions.  I am looking at the Coolscan
2000 and printers.  From what I can find out the Epson 800 series are very
good 1440 x 720 dpi imaging.  I looked at an ALPS (www.alpsusa.com) 5000
printer that was nothing short of amazing.  It had b & w print samples that I
would have been proud to print in my darkroom.  It was only $600. and was 2400
dpi.

I would like to throw the question among LUGGERS on which negative scanners
and printers they use.  I would like to know if they would make the same
acquisition today as they did when they purchased their equipment.

Please let me know if you find the right solution.

Bob Bedwell



<< Friends:
 
 With this very interesting discussion over the past week on enlargers & 
 lenses, I was wondering what the relative merits of traditional vs. 
 digital printing are.
 Is it still worth it to start with an own darkroom or would it be wiser 
 to invest in a printer with decent color quality?
 Would the quality of the final printed image (up to 20x30 cm 
 enlargements) be "better" with one or the other system or is there not 
 much difference?
 Which system is more cost-effective?
 
 I am asking this because I am seriously contemplating to start printing 
 pictures (at least duplicates and enlargements) myself.
 
 I already have a Mac with Nikon Super Coolscan LS-2000 filmscanner, but 
 no color printer.
 What are the decisive factors when having to choose between traditional 
 or digital?
 
 Thanks.
 
 Pascal
 NO ARCHIVE
  >>