Comparisons between
negative and positive scans
I have taken about 50,000 photos of rock stars but only have prints of a fraction of them. As I have received requests to display more of my photos, the only affordable way to do this is to scan the negatives. My choice was to show you the photos in this way or not at all. None of the scanners I have used produce good quality scans from black & white negatives, therefore the scan tends to make the medium grey tones a little strange.

In case you are considering ordering prints but are worried that your prints will look strange; I have scanned some prints so you can see what a print on photographic paper will look like (unfortunately, even a scan from a print does not do a photo justice when it's compressed as a JPEG).

Bob Elliott, from Canada, after receiving his prints wrote saying:
"You do beautiful work! I received the 3 prints this morning
and they are even more stunning than I thought."

Scans from negatives - his face looks freckled or as if he has psoriasis.
Scans from prints on photographic paper - the freckled look has gone.

 
A scan from the negative - the fingers are bleached white and there is no detail in the neck of the guitar.
A scan from a print on photographic paper - there is detail in the fingers and neck of the guitar.
I hope the examples have given you some idea of how a print on photographic paper will look even though the scans from the negatives look a little strange. And a print looks far better than a low resolution JPEG on the screen - even if it's a scan from a print.