That wasn't a particularly helpful comment Martyn.
Chris
~~ >-)-
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
www.threeshoes.co.uk
homepage.mac.com/zuiko
On 17 Oct 2005, at 21:59, Martyn Smoothy wrote:
>
> So what - live with it.....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Michael King [mailto:jking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 17 October 2005 15:37
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] Re: When digital is no good...
>
>
>
>
>
>> Again, no matter whether film or chrome, it simply isn't a fair
>> comparison
>> of digital files vs. a scanned and printed film. That, of course,
>> precludes
>> any comparison other than one made in person, but who said life is
>> fair...
>>
>> I'm considering having a digital file written to a film recorder, and
>> having
>> a print made to compare with an optical print.
>>
>
> I agree, I was shocked at the difference between my scans and the
> originals. I never owned a projector and so my only expereince was
> looking
> at the scans. I assumed that film was ok but not that sharp. then I
> got a
> light table and a loupe...
>
> by the time I have scanned my slides even with the minolta scan
> elite 5400
> they are not even close to what I see on the light table with a 10x
> loupe,
> there is less dynamic range with less shadow detail, its less
> alive, there
> are bags of general detail but its all soft it does not have the
> sharpness
> of the slide. The greens are no where near as saturated.
> James
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|