Brian, dealing with RAW files is not "hassle". It is an indispensable part of
digital photography if you care about image quality.
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com
Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
On May 3, 2010, at 9:13 AM, Brian Swale wrote:
> I have no wish to start another conflagration on this topic, but I have just
> returned to Christchurch from my new home in Central Otago where it is still
> bright autumn.
>
> Prints from Fuji Superia Reala 100 asa (OM4Ti) that I had processed while I
> was away, compared with on-screen images of jpegs taken with the E-3 (of
> the same subjects, taken within seconds of each other) show that much
> more detail and much less blowing-out of highlights (of super-bright leaves
> etc) occurs with the film 5x7 inch prints.
>
> If one doesn't want to go through the hassle of dealing with RAW files.
>
> Brian Swale
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|