Bill's right, but unfortunately for many of us, the comparison of DSLR vs.
scanned film is THE standard. I don't have the capabilities to print my own
images with the level of color correction and dodge/burn that I'd like.
Scanning is the only way for me to accomplish that.
So the two prevailing methods of image capture: Digital Camera and Scanned Film
are the standards. It's not pretty, but it's reality, at least for me.
Skip
>
>Subject: [OM] Re: film vs. digital
> From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 15:51:45 -0500
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>Agreed... except that what's driving *me* to digital (either original
>imagee or scanned from film) is the need to touch-up portaits. So, if
>I'm using film I can't skip the scanning step in most instances.
>
>I love the grain in Tri-X but I've never met a color grain that I liked
>even one little bit.
>
>Chuck Norcutt
>
>BllPear@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> First, I really, really, really, really, really object to the now standard
>> of comparing
> > a digital photo with a scan of a slide. That's just plain wrong.
>
>
>The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
>To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
>
>To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
>List Problem"
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|