tOM Trottier wrote:
> http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/ndq.shtml
>
Thanks for the link. An interesting article for me.
It makes me feel pretty good, since my own experience and conclusions
are not much different from his, but adds some additional perspectives.
It was especially nice to read about a pro who switched to color neg
some years ago for the same reasons I did. His peers probably made fun
of him too. :-)
It also makes me feel better about just buying the second edition of
Harald Johnson's book on digital printing. I figured since the first ed.
was about the only tech book or manual I have read pretty much all the
way through in decades, the second edition would be worthwhile. I
haven't cracked it yet, but it's only been here a couple of days. The
section Mark refers to where he collaborated in tests on printer
resolution sounds useful. It was Harald who first made sense for me on
this subject and both improved my printing and made it easier with his
knowledge in the first ed.
It is possible to make really nice prints from properly scanned film,
even fairly fast, grainy stuff. I'm not so sure about his goal of "NDQ".
Film and digital tend to just look somehow different. At their best,
both are good enough to disappear and let the image be the thing seen,
and that seems to me to be the point.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|