The difference of a printed image

The great thing about photography is that we are always learning something and discovering new interests and motivation for our work. As I am preparing as you all know two exhibitions - and probably a 3rd which probably will be related with military aircrafts - I am re-discovering the pleasure of seeing a printed image and to be honest, it is quite different than when seeing them on a monitor. I had to decide wether I would print them in a A4 size but in my humble point of view and for exhibiton purposes, A4 is too small and I was able to confirm, being that A3+/B+ ( 19x13 inches or 48,3x33 cms ) is the smallest acceptable size to pull out all the detail and nuances of a BW - and probably colour - photograph, being that at an exhibition, people do see the works at a certain distance. Of course this is only the case when we are printing for exhibitions purposes. Yesterday I printed one photograph that on the monitor was kind of "dull" but after printing it...well, I was astonished and I went back 35 years ago, remenbering the pleasure I used to have when making enlargements in my analogue darkroom. Of course that developing and printing digital photography does not have the "mistery" analogue had but the results with the evolution of cameras, printers, inks and papers are nonetheless as good as they were. I believe that analogue photography is almost dead. Kodak does not manufacture any more, paper for the "analogue darkroom" and even all the chemistry involved to make analogue photography is getting harder and harder to find. Besides and making a direct comparison, the cost per print - and I am talking about BIG prints - is more or less the same. So, my dear fellow photographers, if you have "that special capture" go for it: print it in a big size and you'll enjoy even more your art. Cheers