Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have been following the thread on the HP PhotoSmart with interest. Like most (all ?) of us, I scan (CanoScan 2700F) and print (HP whatever). It is fun. But is it "good" ? I find it a bit contradictory to spend mountains of fortunes of hard earned (or not so hardly earned) money on the ultimate quality in 35mm photography, and then show enthusiasm or even satisfaction towards the results provided by consumer level scanning and printing. I admit that progress has been enormous on that front and I am sure digital is the way of the not so far future. But I refuse to see today's comsumer grade imaging as a quality alternative to darkroom printing. To get the most out of a Leica (or Nikpentcanolta) image, you'd need a very high end scanner, with very high performances in the fields of resolution, of bit depth analysis and of dynamic range. With consumer grade scanners, you end up with a compromise file that annihilates 99 pct of the imaging "superiority" we are all looking for in Leica equipment. That is acceptable if the end-product is a Web page or a proof print. I find it very hard to accept if the end-product is going to be a final print. If one is ready to spend 10,000 USD on a full M system, one should maybe not act like a low-end shopper when gathering digital capture, processing and printing equipment. Put side by side a 18 x 25 cm hand masked Ilfochrome or a high quality enlargment from a good negative and the print out from any consumer grade digital imaging system, and the differences will be more than obvious. If one does not find these differences worthwhile of the effort, then I sincerely question the motivations to get equipped with high end cameras and lenses in the first place.... As a matter of fact, I would very much like more bridges going FROM digital TO emulsion. I'd like to have an easier time getting Photoshopped files recorded on film ! Friendly regards Alan Brussels-Belgium srlondon@ibm.net wrote: > > On the topic of scanners and such, I thought that it might be useful to mention an excellent printer I recently acquired, the Epson Stylus Photo 700. Unless you're doing web publishing, a scanner is only as good as your method of output. >...<CUT>...... > In the limited time I've had to experiment with the printer using the Epson coated photo paper (similar to conventional glossy color photo paper in weight and finish), the results are nothing less than outstanding. >.....<CUT>......