Well, if you stop obsessing on the leaves at the base of the
trees and take a step back so you can see the forest, it's
easy to understand.

Over the decades, people have developed an appreciation for
B&W photography.  Some of those people most appreciate the
process by which B&W prints are produced, and some of those
people most appreciate the B&W prints themselves, regardless
of the process used to produce them.

If all you consider is the process, then, sure, IJ != SG
and never will, they're two different processes.

If all you consider are the prints, it's completely reasonable
to expect that good prints can be produced using different
processes.

How much an inkjet print can look like a SG print is really
a matter of how close one looks; we're already at a point
where one has to peer closely to tell the difference today.
At some point, perhaps one will need a microscope.

So, people want to make IJ prints that look like the good
prints they've viewed over the decades, prints necessarily
made on SG paper.  That's the point and should be quite
easy to grasp.  As technology and tastes evolve, the desire
to reproduce the look of SG paper may fade, but it's a natural
place for enthusiasts of B&W prints to start.

Cheers,
Dana  K6JQ

July 11, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,

Maybe make it by hand, with three tiny
brushes and three primary colors (or whatever
they're called).

I used to know someone who could do this.

It's just a sophisticated scanner and printer
combination. The hardware is expensive and
the software takes a lifetime to install.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
website: www.heylloyd.com
telephone: 416-686-0326
email: portrait@heylloyd.com
________________________________
--