B/W printing - in a darkroom or a digital print with a scanner & printer?

B/W printing - in a darkroom or a digital print with a scanner & printer?

  • Darkroom

    Votes: 149 54.6%

  • Scan & view/print

    Votes: 137 50.2%
  • Total voters
    273
Darkroom vs Digital process

Darkroom vs Digital process

I have both darkroom and digital scanning and printer. I believe the traditional darkroom can produce the best B&W prints ( I never print color). however, I have become sensitized to the chemicals , causing breathing problems. While I development film, I have been scanning the negatives and slides and printing on an Epson 2400. I have had excellent results with either method.

Paul
 
I have a "family" reason to prefer the digital camera chiara. I'm travelling a a few days a week because of my work, and it would be not nice to my wife if when I come back home I close myself in a dark room. Our flat is an openspace, she can watch television, or read a book, I'm sitting in front of a monitor not so far and we can speak each other, commenting or what is on the tv screen or on the monitor. It works, at least for us.
rob
PS we are not so long married!
 
That is one more reason to have a wet or traditional darkroom; to get away from the wife, and the mother in law . . . I need a break from them as well sometimes.
 
Darkroom for B&W
Scanner for Color

So I voted for both options (checked both boxes)! There was no error message. I wonder, how this vote was counted? :eek:

Michael
 
So far i tossed a Lexmark and an Epson with about 3 prints off each.

i am working with a Kodak dye-sub 1400 that is a gem so far. Turn it on and it works. Period.

I still prefer my darkroom equipped with the best money can buy.
 
Well - my 35mm/mf work has moved to mostly online presentation or transmission for publication. Editors REALLY don't want prints anymore. However, they usually comment on B&W shots something like, "wow, you did that with film..."

Prints on rag paper from the Epson 2200 are great and I can always send out for a "real" print.

That said, my darkroom is still set up for film development and contact printing from 8x10 negatives. The enlarger is gone but the bare bulb and timer are there - very primitive but all that is needed for that medium.
 
I really like printing digital. I just ordered new inks for my 2200 and I'm eyeing the R2400 (with its current $100 rebate). I work on a computer all_day_long, and I have no problem coming home and working on scanning, editing, and printing images on a computer. I like also like digital printing because I can make prints without hiding away in a darkroom. I don't need or want to "get away" from my family. In fact hermit-ing away usually gets me in MORE trouble.

I like the consistency of "edit once, print many." Photoshop is fantastic, my favorite application. What I really miss from the darkroom are contact sheets.

,
 
pauledell said:
I have both darkroom and digital scanning and printer. I believe the traditional darkroom can produce the best B&W prints ( I never print color). however, I have become sensitized to the chemicals , causing breathing problems. While I development film, I have been scanning the negatives and slides and printing on an Epson 2400. I have had excellent results with either method.

Paul
Click to expand...


Paul,

I had the same problems working with chemicals, so I bought a Nikon LS-8000ED scanner about six yrs ago and started scanning and using photoshop as my darkroom. It was neat to see that you're in New Haven, Indiana. I'm right next door in Fort Wayne! I don't think i've seen anyone else here from the area.
 
I didn't vote, because I'm in the middle of this quandry. Do I go darkroom or digital scan and print?
At this time I only use film.
I've been sending my work out, all of it, Black and White and color. The color is acceptable but the Black and White, in a word: sucks. The commercial systems used are not good.
So I must do it myself at some point or forget it.

The options are of course:
-Scan, photoshop and print. Would give me Black and White and color $$$$
-Black and White darkroom and forget color. $ (have all the stuff, must set up)
-Go all digital and really spend $$$$$!
-Be a mall potato and read the newspaper all day. Very reasonable
 
literiter:

For one thing, I'd forget Option #4; that way lies madness. ;)

It really comes down to What Works Best. If you can see yourself sweating it a bit, get the darkroom set up, but only if you think you can set it up to work to a standard you'll be happy with, otherwise you'll find yourself emerging from the darkness, squinty-eyed, and muttering to yourself, "Damn...if only I started with a poured-concrete floor...". (A mediocre darkroon will do you no favors.)

In which case, you're best off grabbing as good a film scanner as you can afford off the 'Bay or elsewhere, and working your level best with it. And, while not exactly dirt-cheap, it will yield good and consistent results, if you pay attention.
 
Last edited:
literiter said:
I didn't vote, because I'm in the middle of this quandry. Do I go darkroom or digital scan and print?
At this time I only use film.
I've been sending my work out, all of it, Black and White and color. The color is acceptable but the Black and White, in a word: sucks. The commercial systems used are not good.
So I must do it myself at some point or forget it.

The options are of course:
-Scan, photoshop and print. Would give me Black and White and color $$$$
-Black and White darkroom and forget color. $ (have all the stuff, must set up)
-Go all digital and really spend $$$$$!
-Be a mall potato and read the newspaper all day. Very reasonable
Click to expand...


I used to have a full black and white darkroom. I rarely shot color. I started getting allergies to the chemicals. And photo labs suck...I have never seen one anywhere that did good black and white at a price mortals can afford. I bought a Nikon LS-8000ED film scanner. This does 35mm and 120 film, because I shoot both film formats. It was expensive, $3000 6 years ago. But it was worth every cent. Virtually every photo you see on my website was shot on film and scanned on that scanner. That's a lot less money than I'd have spent paying a lab for prints of the more than 3000 photos i have scanned in that time. And that scanner's replacement model is only $2000 now. If you only shoot 35mm a Nikon scanner is only $600 new.

I later bought a Nikon D70 digital SLR to try out digital. I used it for commercial work since my clients always want files, not prints. Scanning film for commercial work is too time consuming to be profitable. A 6mp camera like the D70 is cheaper than a 35mm scanner today, but it produces less resolution than you'll get from 35mm film and this is especially apparent in black and white work where the resolution is definately inferior to film. Color actually isn't bad with it, and if you can afford a camera like the D80 (10mp) I think you'll actually prefer digital for color unless you're used to shooting 120 size color film.

I also have a Kodak 14n, 14mp. It is almost medium format quality for color and is actually quite good for black and white, but a digital SLR with that kind of resolution is a lot more costly than a film scanner.
 
Hi,

I prefer the good old fashioned darkroom, and I use one whenever I can (I work at a school and use the darkroom there whenever I can.) But I have spent the last three months or so scanning with a Nikon 5000 scanner, editing on an Intel Mac and printing on an Epson 7800 printer with it's special black & white inkset. I still enjoy the craft and feeling of the darkroon, but I can get results with the digital setup much more efficiently.

If I had to do this for a living, it would be a no-brainer. Since I don't, there are the best of both worlds available to me.
 
The main reason for me to end up the darkroom was the bad feeling I had for
wasting really big amounts of precious drinking water! (I only made baryt prints)
I still use film and do my own developement of 35mm and 120 rolls, but then
scan and print (B/w carbon ink) on fine paper. Wish I could have done this 30 years ago!
 
This is about fun for me. As such, I have a wonderful B&W darkroom built in my basement. It used to be color also but that was not really fun with drum proicessing etc. I send color out and its not too bad but I shoot mostly B&W and print in the darkroom. Its how I have fun and thats subjective!! There is only a right answer if you have to make a living at it!
 
The analogy that springs to mind for me is 'instant freeze-dried rehydrated, or freshly cooked with top-quality ingredients?' (I have also written cookbooks...)

Yes, I have both. Yes, I scan negs for publication. But if I want the best possible print for publication: print in the darkroom and scan that. My wife, who is a far better printer than I, feels even more strongly about it.

When we bought our current house in 2003, the first room we sorted was the darkroom.

Cheers,

R.
 
I've built my own darkroom this year and love it. I will still scan negs. Will probably buy the new Artix scanner late this year or sometime next. And continue to use a pro-lab for color/slide work.I love the process of making a print as well as the learning invloved. I also want to learn some of the alternative processes a some point. It's very relaxing to put on some music, turn all the lights off and play with light in my own private space.
 
Nikon Coolscan andEpson inkjet - I haven't been in a darkroom for many years. The digital darkroom is a major convenience because (1) I no longer own any darkroom equipment, (2) I have no space for a darkroom and (3) I can leave the scanning/printing at any time without any clean up - trays, chemicals, etc. But, I do miss it!

Mike
 
The IDEA of wet printing appeals to me and I know that part of the magic of photography is seeing the image appearing during the printing process. However, I am just at a stage where I am only starting to develop my B&W negs..... I'll just let myself get over that 'hurdle' first.

Logistics at the moment does not seem to allow me to print.... seems like way too much chemicals, fiddly bits, and taking up too much space. I simply cannot dedicate a place in the house for this.
 
I've been scanning and printing for a year now. But I'm currently in the process of building my own home darkroom to get back to working with real prints.
 
I do inkjet-not because I think it's better, but because it's what I have. I think the darkroom still gives better results in b+w.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top