For Ken (or anyone digitizing BW):
Is the proper way to digitize BW to scan the film? or is it better to
make wet prints of the negative that realize a "performance" of sorts
(Adam's lingo) and then scan that on a good flatbed?
I'm not trying to load the second method so as to make that the obvious
choice. I'm sure the second method is viable (and I know people selling
BW digital prints for good money doing that). What I'd like to know is
if anyone is happily making successful digital BW prints from film scans
and not thinking "This is OK for web work, but I wonder if it wouldn't
be nicer as a wet print ..."
Joel W.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of AG Schnozz
> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 7:28 PM
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] Why Film instead of Digital
>
> Just maybe Gary is onto something. Just maybe my purchase of
> the M*nolta A1 was part of the bigger picture. Just maybe I
> won't get a new DSLR, but instead just get a new scanner (much
> cheeper) and shoot film for a while yet. For one thing, I
> have a big investment in a darkroom--both money and time
> developing skillsets.
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|