As I previously reported,
I've had the chance to see some traditional prints executed from medium
format negative film.
Both, some made from a friend of mine, an italian Photografer that
makes very interesting research work in the field of colour
composition, and recently at the museum of photography in Lausanne.
Sure, digital C*n*n files beat these as regard to sharpness and
cleanliness (did i write it right?), but the "feel" conveied from these
images is totally different from that conveyed from digital.
There are some interesting studies ongoning on the way film grain does
affect the way we perceive an image, I would compare it to the
difference that there is between Vinyl and digital in hearing music.
Moreover, the dinamic range attained from MF negative film, is simply
out of reach for anything digital is not a BetterLight Scanning back,
to name one.
What we call "noise", or "grain" is in fact an important part of the
perceptive experience, as the Pointillist School did know very vell.
As i said, I think of film and digital as two different media to
exploit artistic vision.
Therefore, any direct comparison simply is a non-sense, unless it helps
unveil something new on the way we perceive through vision.
When I think about digital I think about freedom; this is the real
change that I do find in the "digital revolution".
And, sure, for a reporter or a photographer doing commercial work
digital is a great time and money saver.
Just my two cents.
Alfredo (who desperately needs to improve his english).
On Aug 23, 2005, at 1:02 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> You apparently haven't read the article. The 20D is not mentioned
> since
> the article was written 2 years before it was announced. The comment
> about the 20D is my own interpolation of the data. Please take the
> time
> to read it before knocking down the conclusion.
>
> The article compares output from the 1Ds (11 MP) to Fuji Velvia rated
> at
> ISO 40 and scanned on an Isomet 405HR drum scanner as well as a 3200
> ppi
> Imacon. From the images presented the 1Ds image is clearly superior to
> the Imacon scan and fully equal to the drum scan.
>
> The images are there for you to see. Either he lied or the 1Ds at 11
> MP
> is the equal of a 6x7 negative at far less cost. It took the high cost
> drum scan to equal (not beat) the digital image.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
> http://www.chucknorcutt.com/
>
> AG Schnozz wrote:
>>> If you're shooting 35mm film the 20D (8MP) has already passed
>>> you by.
>>> If you're shooting 6x7 the 1Ds (11MP) passed you by almost 3
>>> years ago.
>>> Hard to believe? Look at the data presented here:
>>> <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml>
>>
>>
>> If this was REALLY true, why do people tend to say "digital is
>> better than film UP TO X-SIZE, and then beyond that film is
>> better."
>>
>> I wouldn't consider the opinion expressed on luminous-landscape
>> to be the end-all in this format argument. I can guarantee you
>> that he'll dump that p.o.s. 20D for the 5D in a heartbeat. Then
>> you'll hear him crow about how it's better than 35mm film--all
>> over again. Hey, according to him, even the 30D was better than
>> 35mm film.
>>
>> I surely would be ticked if I had just invested a fortune in a
>> C*non APS setup... "Whadda mean these lenses don't work?"
>>
>> AG-living in the world of 4/3-Schnozz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
>> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>>
>>
>> ==============================================
>> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>> ==============================================
>>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|