I hate to get dragged into a film vs. digital debate, there's already few
too many. However, objectively speaking, some generalizations -
- The world is moving to digital. No doubt about it. However, just like
there is a revival of sort for analog recording, film does have its uses
and places, and may never quite go away completely.
- Digital have better and more accurate color rendition already
- Digital enlargements look better and sharper because there is no grain
and because of the larger DOF factor due to smaller sensor size for all
except the Kodak 14n and the Canon 1Ds.
- Digital 5/6MPs do not have the details as compared to the some of the
finer grain films
So personally, I can see why most people would prefer enlargements from a
digital camera. For me though, I will use my film cameras for a while
longer yet, for my own reasons, which may or may not be applicable to any
other person....
FWIW
At 09:24 PM 12/4/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Exactly my "hyperbull" point I made the other day. If I were to show you
side by side prints taken with my D60 or 1D from my little Epson 820 or
from an Epson 2200, compared to the same photo taken with 35 mm print
film, or made from a slide as an Ilfochrome, the digital print would look
better. I'm not just blowing smoke here. They *do* look better. It's not
just me that says this, Mike Veglia made the same exact point earlier this
week and someone else posted last weekend that they saw an 11X14 print
shot from a 5 megapixel wonderbrick with no sharpening or postprocessing
and printed from an Epson 2200 that was so sharp and detailed it made him
want to throw his OM gear in the trash and give up photography. I've got
shots printed on my Epson 820 that have so much depth, sharpness and
clarity that they give the impression of slide film; shots were you can
see the pinholes in the leathers of a motorcycle racer who is going 85 mph
in the shot. Today I was reading an article in Digital Photo Pro about
Jody Dole, a long-time NY pro who was been using digital since 1990, and
still uses both media (film and digital) as the needs arise. He recently
shot a job both digitally and with film, and handed both to his client
in a "blind taste test"...the client chose digital. "The quality I can
get out of the Nikon D1X is, in most cases, better than film. So, there's
very little reason for me to use 35 mm film. If I'm going to film, I'm
going to medium format film." Moreover, you would be surprised how large
you can make a print these days and still have the print look crisp and
sharp from a camera with a 4 megapixel camera. Anyone who doubts that, go
down to Pictopia in Emeryville, CA and see what they produce on a daily
basis. I know many of you are still skeptical about these claims, but if
you were to work with these cameras as much as Mike and I have, you would
be a believer, but you would still be amazed at the quality.
-Stephen.
// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please
use richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
< 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 >
|