Michael, by "computer" and "the easy way out" I am assuming that you are referring to the use of the scanner. The scanner shows me an unbiased image of my negative, what its supposed to look like. Without it I would be chasing my tail, no way to tell me what I'm doing wrong. Eventually I hope to move beyond this stage, to be able to read and interpret the negative, and print accordingly. But I'm not there, I'm still painting by the numbers. Michael, check out post number 2 of this thread, six months ago I did not even have a scanner.
Taking the easy way out? Not when it has taken up to 15 work prints just to get it to look like the scan, that's at 45-minutes per print.
If you ask me, I say you are doing it the hard way, without realizing it. Your scanner does not show an unbiased image. What your scanner will teach you is to make thin, low contrast negatives, that do not print well, but scan fine. It's great to know that if you are shooting for a scan, but in general, the best negative for a print won't scan well, and vice versa. It sounds like you are working on being a fine printer, and I'm not trying to rain on your parade, just advising in the kindest way that the scanning may well become an impediment to your developing. (hey, I made a pun!) If your goal is print making, you should be exposing and developing your negatives for your paper, not a scanner.