Well - If I was doing commercial work, I'd do digital in a heart beat. I have nothing against digital except the techno-wienies that think film is dead. They said print is dead too. It isn't. I have friends that shoot digital and look at their colletions on their computers and that makes them happy. - That is fine. Then they print them out and that is fine too. It is not my cup of tea - although some of them look really good. It is just not what I am into. For the monochrome art I am interested in, digital is a tool but never the end result. Scanning 4x5 color slides and printing them on photo paper with a lightjet 5000 printer is fine ... but not with ink. Ink is for writing and for magazines. Repairing bad negs by going digital .... Well - fine, I guess. Might as well get out the paintbrush. It is art - but is it photography? Probably not the way I think of photography. Sure - we do darkroom manipulation all the time - and a flat piece of paper is only a symbol of how we feel about what we see - It is not 3D with 180 Deg of view and a highlighted area of interest that our brains are scoping out like a 500mm telephoto all at the same time. A photograph is by ist very nature a manipulation of what we saw. But it is an image that is faithful to the glass and chemistry involved in the capture. Darkroom image manipulation is different than what many folks are doing in PS. Fine .. call it art - but call it like it is - computer imagery - not photography.

As far as Barry being my hero - well, I exagerate.

He really did make a lot of things make sense to me. I did get a Rollei (and no regrets) I do like DiXactol for medium format (Pyro is better for 4x5 IMHO) My favorite is still PMK in 4x5. I am grateful for his insights.

Frank