----- Original Message -----
From: "Dawid Loubser"
> Thanks, glad you like my (what I though was rather mundane) image :-)
>
> I agree that your upscaled 5D MkII image is not that far off from my
> Mamiya scan, and to answer
> your last question/statement, B&W film (Ilford) is a heck of a lot
> more grainy than digital, or
> Provia or Ektar colour film. When I scan Provia to the same
> dimensions, there is just absolutely no
> (nada, zip) grain. I also find that colour slide film (ISO 100) has
> vastly more resolution than ISO 100
> black and white film - not sure why this is? One apparently has to use
> Pan F to match the resolution and (not
> even then) the smoothnes of Provia 100F.
I have very little experience in B/W film, I always think B/W film has
higher resolution, seems I was wrong.
>
> I must say, I am thrilled that a scan on a cheap-ish flatbed from my
> Mamiya negatives beat a very high-res
> DSLR like the 5DII. However, when you look at a 16x20 wet print from
> this same negative, or a high-end scan
> on e.g. a Flextight, it will be some time yet until any one-shot
> digital capture matches it.
I can't agree on your 'cheap-ish' flatbed, the V700's resolution is tested
to be very close to N*kon 4000ED. Ok, 4000ED is also not a pro scanner but
on the other hand I did use microscope to examine some slides and found a
good 4000dip scan is already resolved most details from the film.
>
> However, while the resolution is nice, the sole reason I am messing
> around with B&W is because of the
> tonality, I have a carefully made digital capture of that exact same
> scene (EF 50mm f/1.2L at optimum
> diffraction-limited aperture, mirror lockup, ESO 1DMkIIN) and the look
> is just totally different, and
> I really love wet-printing.
>
There should be little different between wet-print and digital print like
Frontier output if one can master the process, tone can be adjusted in every
way you wanted digitally.
> Once it gets old, I am sure I will be thrilled with what contemporary
> digital provides then.
>
> P.S. Your image has again awakened the need within myself to get an OM
> 35/2.0 lens! The quality is highly
> impressive, I can't believe anybody ever complains about that lens
> being "soft", from what you post, I should be
> getting spectacular 9x11in prints from it. Thanks for showing...
>
It is so sad to see the 5D II with OM 35/2 is only good for making 9x11
print :-)
C.H.Ling
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|