Archived posting to the
Leica Users Group, 2006/09/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index]
[Home]
[Search]
Subject: [Leica] Re:Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate)
From: leicachris at worldnet.att.net (Christopher Williams)
Date: Sun Sep 3 07:52:33 2006
References: <44FA25D8.3030006@adrenaline.com><004501c6cefe$b6976cf0$0a01a8c0@MacPhisto> <44FA3B99.6020105@adrenaline.com> <009201c6cf18$0386f9e0$0a01a8c0@MacPhisto><667e9af89b81d2d50135b9b26d715c80@earthlink.net> <44FAA8B1.4000108@adrenaline.com>
Lenses play a roll also. Look at all the heavily coated high contrast
Japanese lenses compare to the "natural" Leica look.
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott McLoughlin"
Subject: Re: [Leica] Re:Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate)
> Yes you may dare!!! That's a really good point. The DMR samples
> I've seen on the Web look pretty fabulous. I recall one early shot that
> someone posted either here or pnet looked quite a bit like Kodachrome.
> A different look.
>
> So there's an interesting datapoint. What's the nature of the difference
> between the DMR and a D70/D200? Firmware? Inquiring minds want
> to know :-)
>
> Scott
In reply to:
Message from scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin) ([Leica] Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate))
Message from leicachris at worldnet.att.net (Christopher Williams) ([Leica] Re:Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate))
Message from scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin) ([Leica] Re:Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate))
Message from leicachris at worldnet.att.net (Christopher Williams) ([Leica] Re:Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate))
Message from telyt at earthlink.net (Douglas Herr) ([Leica] Re:Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate))
Message from scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin) ([Leica] Re:Skin tone - film vs. digital (not a debate))