Floyd L. Davidson
Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:

Tony Cooper
On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 17:45:26 -0900, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:

[...] most importantly I have a feeling your hardline choice of OS is your real problem, and it is distracting you from paying attention to improving your photography.

That in fact seems to be *your* most serious impediment to improving your photography.

The OP seems to be well aware that a more functional OS is eventually going to allow him to produce better results...]

I am curious how you come up with this. To me, it's like saying a better developing pan will lead to better photographs when working with film.

Floyd L. Davidson
No, it's more like having a drawer full of different sized trays means the user can choose which one is most efficient for any given job. That leads to a more effective system than one where the only trays available come in just one size (that fits all, supposedly).

Since most people never printed anything larger that an 8x10, they don't see a difference. But for the photographer that pushes the limits, trays large enough for 16x20 and 20x24 prints make a huge difference. Not to mention they immediately bought something like an El Nikkor lens rather than use the one that came with the enlarger.

And while a 35mm enlarger from Ponder and Best or Durst, or even the low end Beseler or Omega models might seem like a great production tool for many, real darkroom workers wouldn't consider anything less that a Beseler 23C, and would rather have either a Beseler or an Omega 4x5 enlarger, even if all they ever work with is 35mm film.

It's the difference between printing today with an Epson 2800 or using an Epson 4880 or 7890.