Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPablo  You can do that both with film and with digital. Choose the tool that fits your vision and technique the best. |
Paul, yes I think I agree with you. What I mean is that in producing certain photographic images, with all my own emotional attachments to the process that is achieving that image, film is still the "best" way to get there. I could possibly achieve this "best" through digital means also, but maybe not surpass it. What I was wondering was whether the ability of digital processes to record tone at a micro/pixel level wheras silver only seems to be able to be black or not-black at that level, could achieve a new or different effect. I was not trying to state that silver imaging is morally or technically the best in any general way. In many respects I think digital photography is "better" than silver photography and is just a natural and useful part of the evolution of photography. I would also say that I feel very different about photography compared to other image production techniques, particularly in the emotional realm. I find using pastels much more intimate than photography for instance. I have also seen images produced in other media which are indistinguishable from film, or that can produce images which could not be produced that way. Each may well be the "best" in their own contexts
It intrigues me that you say that silver images are better than digital on the very small level as my own understanding makes me feel that the ability of digital to record tone at a micro level should actually be the opposite. maybe the technology and software lags behind the potential of the process.
Thanks for helping me to interrogate my own thoughts.