|
|
|
lion
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 3/15/2010 8:46:40 AM
Posts: 131,
Visits: 550
|
|
Okay, just bear with me on this one. Brian and Brandon Write did a comparison. Take a look http://bwrightphoto.blogspot.com/2009/05/digital-vs-film-real-deal-nikon-d300-vs.html
I listened to their interview on inside analog photo. It was great.
D.
My website: Colorado Photographer: Lofgreenimages.com
|
|
|
|
|
pachyderm
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/16/2010 1:44:01 PM
Posts: 801,
Visits: 3,634
|
|
| Interesting article ... I see that the author compares MF film to digital. I suspect you could get the same quality out of 35mm, but the weak link is the scanner. Everyone seems to have to compare a digital image file to a scanned image; in other words, a first generation digital file,, to a second generation scan. The comparison will not be fair, given the current state of scanners. I remember once, someone put a 35mm slide under a microscope, then compared it to the digital file - the slide won out in every respect (including sharpness). No worries, I'm not the least bit interested in digital. BTW, I loaded that Podcast onto my Zune last night ... I'm going to listen to it as I work this afternoon. Thanks for reminding me about it.
Robert M. Teague---------------------------------------------
Website: www.visionlandscapes.com
Blog: visionlandscapes.spaces.live.com
"Fujifilm remains true to its heritage and to the acknowledged superior image quality delivered by professional photographic film products." -- Fuji Press Release An old Hasidic story says we should wear a coat with two pockets in order to receive God's message. In one pocket, the message is: "You are nothing but one of billions of grains of sand in the universe." In the other, the message is: "I made the universe just for you."
|
|
|
|
|
tiger
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2010 9:43:19 AM
Posts: 61,
Visits: 168
|
|
| It's a pleasure to see film come out ahead, but it always did strike me as unfair that these comparisons are all done in the digital domain. Our eyes are analog, after all, and I think the final evaluation and outcome belongs in that domain. On scientific principles, the argument of generational loss is valid, and skews the results in favor of digital. In my own practical observation, I have a modest collection of blowups, some made from negatives in the darkroom (2nd generation), and some made from negatives that were scanned and then printed (3rd generation). The darkroom prints have better clarity. Would it be better to compare best digital prints from a digital source, against best analog prints from an analog source? This would be 2nd generation vs. 2nd generation, and encompass more than just the information captured on the respective media, but a direct comparison of analog "raw" captured information with digital raw data is not possible without an uneven number of conversions. At least in this case both would have one generational loss, and the outcome would be tangible prints, which could be considered final products. The results of this kind of experiment could not be shared on anywhere near the wide scale that posting digital results on the internet allows, but until we stop force fitting analog photos into the digital domain for comparison, analog will always be at an unfair disadvantage. John
|
|
|
|
|
pachyderm
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/16/2010 1:44:01 PM
Posts: 801,
Visits: 3,634
|
|
jjc (8/15/2009)
The results of this kind of experiment could not be shared on anywhere near the wide scale that posting digital results on the internet allows, but until we stop force fitting analog photos into the digital domain for comparison, analog will always be at an unfair disadvantage. John Amen...
Robert M. Teague---------------------------------------------
Website: www.visionlandscapes.com
Blog: visionlandscapes.spaces.live.com
"Fujifilm remains true to its heritage and to the acknowledged superior image quality delivered by professional photographic film products." -- Fuji Press Release An old Hasidic story says we should wear a coat with two pockets in order to receive God's message. In one pocket, the message is: "You are nothing but one of billions of grains of sand in the universe." In the other, the message is: "I made the universe just for you."
|
|
|
|