To add a bit, what the camera is capable of doing 'in camera' is amazing. I
find myself almost exclusively using the E-20 these days. Blasphemy, I
know. But not only are the results incredible, the amount of
post-processing work is small,small,small. Not just the effort of scanning,
as that's pretty easy (I have a Nikon 4000 ED with the rollfilm adapter),
but the color manipulation, the right amount of unsharp mask, etc. etc. etc.
Do I still shoot, and love, film? Sure. But, digital is oh so close.
Tom
From: "dreammoose" <dreammoose@xxxxxxxxx>
<snip>
You may recall a list member providing a direct comparison between a
> digicam (E-10?) and an unadjusted scanned image from an OM and remarking
> how much better the digicam image looked. Another member (C.H.?)
> correctly pointed out that the digicam image already had been optimized
> in the camera for viewing at the resolution presented, while the scan
> had not.
>
<snip>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|