>>3792041Chemical printing really doesn't hold a candle to the newer digital pigment printing. So that means that whether you do it with an enlarger or a "c-print" or "light-jet" or whatever it's done using chemical photo papers. The archival quality is really quite junk, but they can look pretty. This of course doesn't apply to stuff like dye-transfer carbon printing which is a whole different animal.
At the end of the day, the inks from a quality digital photo printer will likely last far longer than any enlargement would - and will be far easier to get the results you want consistently. Of course I'm sure there's magic to printing in the darkroom. That's how I always did my b&w stuff and loved the way it looked. Never messed with color darkroom printing, and I wouldn't knock anyone for doing it just because it won't last as long as a pigment print.
>>3792127That was with a 135mm lens.
