I think the "best" approach is more dependent on a few other factors
than your comfort with darkroom work. Are you VERY comfortable with a
computer and (especially) Photoshop?
If you're going to print from camera exposed negatives, to add a step
in between the printing process wouldn't have any advantage.
If you're working from smaller negatives than your final desired image
size, the procedure for making enlarged negatives isn't as difficult as
the methods of digitizing first a negative or finished silver print and
the process of converting it to a high-resolution contact negative.
As far as Dan's method goes, I'm happy with it, but my work is
multi-image, very manipulated, and with artifacts of depth like texture,
drop-shadows, etc...it has to be digital to be done with any comfort at
all. I use the negs with silver, VD, and Cyanotype. I've got a
Argyrotype bottle sitting next to me as I write, waiting for a test run
over the weekend. Until I get solvent, aka OUT of graduate school, I'll
not be doing any large scale platinum projects.
I've heard several alt-processors (of a renaissance variety, wink, wink)
here complain about a certain point in a long tonal scale which gets
gritty. Others use a very high line screen. luciana@monroe.ny.frontiercomm.net (Beakman are you out there?)
Computers are great for making negatives, but they may not be a "better"
way to get a negative that will be great for platinum.
Good luck.
Later.
Darryl Baird
http://www.why.net/users/rosebud/
----------