I followed the link to Andrew's Facebook page and found this reply by him :
My comment wasn’t aimed at photographers who learned on film, battled with low speed tranny and mis-matched polaroids, or camera shake in low light. You know your stuff and your work is excellent. I was taking a pot shot at the digital upstarts who think they have invented photography and consider themselves geniuses.
I started out with film (at my age, what else was there
) and moved to digital when the Nikon D100 came out. The problem was, with 35mm film, and with a 6 Megapixel sensor, I could never really achieve the print sizes I envied.
Soon after upgrading the Nikon D100 to a Nikon D200, I saw an LF workshop being advertised by a certain Paul Owen and, since it was free and I would be allowed to "borrow" a camera, I felt it was an opportunity not to be missed. Wow! What a mistake to make
A dozen or so years later and thousands of pounds poorer, I still adore the equipment and the results it produces.
Now I not only own an LF camera but, also two Mamiya MFs: an RZ67 and a 7II.
I process all my own film, both B&W and E6 but really can't accommodate the idea of having to dedicate a room with running water and smelly chemicals. So, I taught myself how to scan and process my film in Photoshop.
I seriously resent those wet printers who say that there is a lack of skill in this hybrid process. First there is the fact that, in order to produce a good print from a sheet of film, it is essential that you produce the very best sheet of film. Then comes the business of scanning the film and preparing the resulting file for printing. I can spend many hours, sometimes over several days, working with Photoshop to achieve a file that will print perfectly.
For B&W I work with multiple curve layers, masking them in much the same way that I would dodge and burn with an enlarger. Not to forget the hours spent despotting.
The resulting files are then either printed on an A3+ printer or sent to Ilford for their laser analogue printing service for the larger sizes. I defy anyone to be able to distinguish such a print from Ilford from one produced from an enlarger.
Recently, I succumbed to upgrading my Nikon D200 to a D810. With 36 Megapixels and a tonal range of 14 stops, I find myself seriously wondering whether I really need to hold on to the Mamiyas. The quality and detail it produces are approximately the same as a 6x7 neg scanned at 2400ppi.
Would I ever get rid of my film cameras? Hmmm, there's a conundrum. I adore the look and feel of them and still get a thrill out of opening the developing tank to find the film is everything I hoped it would be. Peering at an image on a small screen on the back of any digital camera, deleting it and trying again is nowhere near as challenging as having to ensure you got it right first time.
If someone produced a digital 5x4 camera, would I be tempted? In a heartbeat! But it would have to have a full 5x4 screen on the back, bellows focusing and a darkcloth