The final validation for me came this week. In speaking with my latest corporate client, I learned that until this week he thought that all the enlargements that I have been selling them were all taken on film.

Let me backup: last year I gave up on the idea of buying a 2nd film body and committed to all digital by buying lens instead. With the recent purchase of Photoshop CS2 and a large format printer, I am now completely independent of outside sources (labs) - like before when I used my darkroom. The combination of CS2 and Epson printer really made it a no-brainer in staying with all digital. My current enlargements far exceed the dynamic range and resolution I was getting out of my own darkroom. With far less time, effort, and mess.

There was another thread about how large a 35mm image could be enlarged. For me, the largest acceptable were 14" x 20"s. And only those were ones with the best optics I could afford (Zeiss primes), slowest possible films (usually K64 and sometimes K25), using the best techniques I could muster. Needless to say, I didn't have as many 14" x 20"s as I would have liked. My current results are already approaching those levels - all with Canon's lowly 10D, 6.3mp.

What's the point? I've run out of reasons for anyone to shoot film (35mm and medium format). I wouldn't want to be in the film manufacturing industry.

I'm sure that this all has been stated before in one form or another. Just wanted to say that I'm joining all of you already in the 10101010 crowd.

Getting late. Rambling now.