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: Re: [Leica] B.D. on "Disclosure Requirements" From the LUG Archives
From: "Gerry Walden" <gwpics@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:36:21 +0100
References: <57b49757b397.57b39757b497@shaw.ca>

You know, a lot of these on-list spats would not arise if we kept to the 
purpose of the LUG - i.e. discussion of things relative to Leica and 
photography using Leica equipment.

Gerry

gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca wrote:

 > 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
 >

- -- 
Gerry Walden LRPS
www.gwpics.com
+44 23 8046 3076

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

In reply to: Message from gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca ([Leica] B.D. on "Disclosure Requirements" From the LUG Archives)