Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tina Manley wrote: > I respectfully disagree. My Leica images scanned with the Nikon LS-2000 > and printed on the Epson PhotoEx are better than the Cibachromes that take > so much work in the darkroom. I'm just talking about color here. hello Tina, I was not thinking of the LS-2000 as an example of 'crummy' scanner. The LS-2000 is a milestone in scanners of its price range. It shows how fast digital imaging is progressing and I would really like to purchase one instead of swearing at the sh*** CanoScan 2700F I have to use today. My question was provocative because I cannot see why what is possible today (with 1 or 2 selected pices of hardware) at the scanning stage should be considered as pure science-fiction at the shooting stage. Regarding the printing, I will certainly not put in doubt your opinion on your own results. Others here have stated similar opinions in previous threads. I do not question those either. But, I sincerely have never had in my hands an inkjet print of one my best color negs or slides that could be considered even remotely near the quality delivered by more 'traditional' enlargements (which I do not manage myself BTW). More precisely, the big problem with Ilfo(ciba)chrome is the management of contrast: too wide a contrast range in the slide will not be properly managed by the paper, unless you go through very complex masking procedures, as you know much better than I do. I can grasp the idea that a digital print out from a very good scan might work better for those slides. But for evenly exposed slides or enlargements of high quality negs, your experience certainly does not converge with mine... > ...snip.... I love film and cannot see > the day that I will go totally digital because of the quality of the > cameras, not the scanners and printers. My point of view is that very high quality digital cameras, taking advantage of high quality glass and nicely built ergonomic bodies, will have to appear sooner than Jim believes they will. If only because the scanners are paving the way, because credible storage devices with sufficient capacity are round the corner and because energy management progresses very fast as well. There will be a point where the 'molecular' advantage of emulsion (which seems difficult to deny) will not be enough of a determinant factor in favour of maintaining part of the process in chemical form in a chain of production that is otherwise fully digital. My fundamental hope is that some of those bodies will use a Leica M mount and others a Leica R mount... Friendly regards, Alan