Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] B.D. on "Disclosure Requirements" From the LUG Archives
From: gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:28:06 -0600

B.D., does these posts of yours ring a bell?

Regards,

Greg

Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital - Rumor Mongering apologies to Mark R.
From: "bdcolen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 12:02:15 -0500

- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An 11 meg file when converted to grayscale for B&W, which I do, becomes
about a 3 to 4 meg file, which leaves very little if any room for
manipulation, particularly to produce large prints. And if you get
better gray scale files from a gray scale conversion of an image that
started as an 11 meg color digital file than you do with what I assume
is a 4000 dpi - or 20 meg 8 bit scan of a T-Max neg, you are doing
something very very wrong with your T-Max. I shoot and scan tri-x, and I
shoot with a camera that produces uncompressed Tiffs of over 11 meg -
and the two simply cannot be compared when producing prints larger than
about 8x10 - certainly not 16x20s.

And, while I understood that you paid for your Digilux, am I not correct
in understanding that you were included in the Cape Cod - Park
Square/Leica underwritten - photo workshop to give a workshop
specifically on the Digilux? That, to me, is doing promotional work for
Leica. God knows there's nothing wrong with it - I'd be happy to do such
work! - but it might have some impact on your view of the quality of how
those 11 meg color tiffs, which reduce to 3-4 meg grayscale tiffs,
produce 16x20s that are superior to 20 meg grayscale scans of film. ;-)

B. D.


- - -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tina
Manley
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 12:49 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital - Rumor Mongering apologies to Mark R.


At 10:30 AM 2/21/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>Tina - The need for large file sizes is NOT exaggerated if you want to 
>produce decent size prints at good resolution. First off, while 
>newspapers can and do use small files because they print at low 
>resolution, I know that when I wrote and shot a story for Newsday last 
>summer, they wanted files of 11 meg, which while not huge, are hardly 
>small.

The files from the Digilux when saved as uncompressed Tiffs are over 11 
megabytes.  So I guess it's not too small!  I've made 16x20 prints that 
surpass prints from TMax 400 film.


>Not wanting to be a pain in the ass - much - but I think this might be 
>a time for us to be reminded that you do work for Leica, including 
>making presentations on the Digilux. The reality here is that the 
>Digilux is a high-end digital P&S, which some people love and which 
>some reviewers don't love - but whether it is or isn't a great P&S, it 
>is hardly a camera that most photojournalists would consider as a main 
>digital camera.

Leica didn't give me Digilux or even a break on the price.  I bought it 
because it is the closest thing available to a digital M.
It will do until something better comes along ;-)   I can't take a big, 
heavy, clunking digital SLR to the Mosquito Coast in April, but I can
take 
the Digilux.
Don't knock it until you've tried it.

With all due respect ;-)

Tina


Tina Manley, ASMP
http://www.tinamanley.com

photos available from:
http://www.pdiphotos.com
http://www.mira.com
http://www.agpix.com
http://www.newscom.com





- - --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- - --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "Gerry Walden" <gwpics@aol.com> (Re: [Leica] B.D. on "Disclosure Requirements" From the LUG Archives)