>It's not a different art form, it is just an evolution of it. (user Unfamiliar, above) //
I think he's kinda right there when he goes on to note that the resulting final image from a digital process can be visually adapted to emulate what can be achieved with film.
But I also think you're right to note that the craft of chemical development is markedly different to digital photo processing (photoshopping or what-have-you) [with or without printing].
It makes me consider typewriters vs. wordprocessors; or a potters hands vs. a jigger [or jolley].
To my mind the road travelled to reach a final artistic presentation can be important even if the evidence of it is not present in the form or image itself.
I think he's kinda right there when he goes on to note that the resulting final image from a digital process can be visually adapted to emulate what can be achieved with film.
But I also think you're right to note that the craft of chemical development is markedly different to digital photo processing (photoshopping or what-have-you) [with or without printing].
It makes me consider typewriters vs. wordprocessors; or a potters hands vs. a jigger [or jolley].
To my mind the road travelled to reach a final artistic presentation can be important even if the evidence of it is not present in the form or image itself.