It's only tangentially about film vs. digital. It's really about large
format (film) vs. medium format (digital). Of course, the medium format
(digital) wins (when you're allowed to set the groundrules) :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 9/26/2011 4:34 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
> There are no film vs. digital debates of note. It is a pastime for
> sad anoraks. The only thing that counts are the images.
>
> Cheers, Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu http://www.nathanfoto.com PICTURE OF THE WEEK:
> http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws Blog:
> http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
>
>
> YNWA
>
>
>
> On Sep 26, 2011, at 4:16 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>
>> I'm not opinionating in any way, but there is another eyebrow
>> twister on Luminous Landscape. The peer review is quite
>> fascinating.
>>
>> OK, you know that I'm barely refraining from launching...but my
>> wife tells me that a little restraint is a good thing.
>>
>> -- Ken Norton ken@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.zone-10.com --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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/
|