Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
The two processes are not mutually exclusive, they are just not the same. And because they are not the same process they produce different end results. Both physically and aesthetically. Which result suits any individual's needs at any given moment is up to each individual to decide for themselves. And that decision may change with each subsequent moment or need.

Go back and reread our extensive PM exchange again. I can't be any more clear and consistent in this common sense position. Neither method is better or worse than the other. They are just not exactly the same thing. And asserting that they are, as you and others have repeatedly done in the past, does a massive disservice to both. As well as to the blindingly obvious realities of both.

So tell me, when you have finished a portrait session do you normally disassemble your camera, then disconnect and remove the CCD sensor, then immerse it into D-76 diluted 1+1 for 11 minutes at 68F/20C with agitation for 10 seconds out of each 60?

Why not??

You see whenever two people have a conversation/exchange with each other there has to be a couple of factors present for it to work. One is that both people must be relatively sane, have an ability at rational thought, maybe have a part of the empathy gene to see the other persons point of view etc etc.

So when your pet peeve is that digital and analog are NOT THE SAME, and some of us say that it pretty much is, there has to be the ability to discern language and realize that of course NOBODY would ever say they are exactly the same thing. But what is meant and you know this, but can't let go of, is that in the evolution of photography from analog to digital, in each case, one part of the process replaced the other. For better or worse, depending on your point of view.

The cameras recording device changed from film to a card. The developing process changed, the retouching part changed, the printing part changed and what was left was a print much like but obviously not exactly like the previous process.

Rational people can follow this and when someone says that to them the process changed, but it still the same thing, only different, we get it. It's not a literal statement. Like my stick shift to automatic transmission analogy. Driving is NOT the same but in rational conversational reality it is. You still drive your car from A to B.

As I said you love the analog process. Great. I love the digital one. And in the workflow, one process changed for another.

So when you want to harp on about how it's not the same technically, it is not. It's the same but different.

But to goal oriented people, since the print on the wall was always the goal and how you got there was fun/ a nuisance/work etc, for us nothing has changed. The subject to a bunch of mundane tasks to the print on the wall. Still the same.

When I say to you, it's a beautiful day. I'm referring to the fact that I'm sitting on my back deck awash in sunshine, with two nude 24 years olds serving me wine, you have to have a few brain processes at work here. You have to assume that where I am it's nice and you get the meaning. You could be up to your ass in snow and don't feel the same way and so to argue with me would seem a bit strange because you have to have an empathy gene and sort of get it. Not the nude 24 year olds but the overall concept.

So when I say the analog process and the digital one are the same for me, to argue and say NO THEY ARE NOT, is just a reflection of how YOU feel, which could be different because you love the analog process and enjoy the workflow. The world of language is not literal, it's nuanced.

So in reality the fact that my nude 24 year olds are actually 44 year olds does not changed the overall concept of a beautiful sunny day.