Why is digital not sharp?

Question

I am used to B&W contact prints from my 8x10 Deardorff and my 12x20 Folmer view cameras. Nice and sharp. Clean and with excellent detail. Rich deep blacks to sparkling whites in prints I do on traditional silver chloride papers.

Have tried a few scans from the negs and had them printed by a few digital labs.

None of the digital prints come close to the contact prints.

What is wrong with digital that it can't match 60 year old technology?

Answer 1

If the lab was using inkjet, or gilché or some such garbage then its the printer. Heres a real conversation with a ritz camera technician:

Me: So, do you use light jet printing at 20x30'' or is it inkjet?

Him: It's photo paper, its really sharp

Me: Light sensitive photo paper? not that crap that epson has for its inkjets?

Him: Oh, its high quality

Me: I don't care how high quality it is, is is on light active paper? do you use Fuji Crystal Active?

Him: Oh yeah, its really nice you cant get better quality.

Me: Are you deaf? I want to know if you are printing light jet!

Him: I've told you that its good quality photo paper. I'm not sure what you're talking about otherwise.

Me: Let me see your printe-

Him: No you cant do that!

Me: Your useless, where's your manager

Him: I am the manager. Listen, I'm a photographer, I know what I'm talking about. This is good quality.

Me: No, your an ******* *** hole. (walk out of the store)

Answer 2

Last night I met Ron Rosenstock (see http://www.ronrosenstock.com/ ), he is considered one of the top 100 living photographers in the world. His work hangs in museums around the globe. He trained under Minor White and was a friend to Ansel Adams. He began his career with Deardorffs and only in the last few years switched to digital. He says he's never going back, sometimes even uses a point and shoot and never shoots raw, just jpeg.

If it's good enough for him it's good enough for me!

Answer 3

ironically, you're pushing the envelope in traditional technology, using 8x10 negatives and view cameras, just like Ansel Adams...

This is why some traditional photographers are skeptical about the digital media- it just doesn't hold a candle...

I've always thought that the printer or output mechanism is the bottleneck for digital imaging.

I don't think it will ever match what you're looking for in terms of quality.

Answer 4

You answered your own question -- digital is only 10 year old technology.

Answer 5

Exactly how did you scan them? Yourself on a cheap flatbed? Or did you get them scanned at a pro lab on a drum scanner? Because there lies your problem.