Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Of course, the better the input, the better the output. My point is, however, that there is a point of diminishing returns. If the end medium is going to be an inkjet photo printer, why not sell the M6 (or R or whatever) and buy a Mac G4, a high end scanner, and some EOS L series lenses to make your life easier. Any quality increase the Leica glass could give you will be lost in the final "print" quality. It seems that if the digital darkroom is the goal, it's better to allocate one's resources on the part that takes the most work and that you have the most control over--PhotoShop and scanning. This all presumes that one (like me) has limited resources with which to work. ;) - --Frank - --- "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> wrote: > Two points...In the first place, the print quality > of the current generation > of Epson inkjet photo printers can hardly be likened > to a textured > ceiling....Is it identical to a silver print? Of > course not. It is a > different medium. But it can produce quite stunning > results... > > And, in the second place, the point I was making was > that the ultimate > output quality will be markedly improved by > improving the input quality. > There is almost always an advantage to using the > best possible quality > lenses to make the original image. Will that image > be degraded by a less > than optimum printing medium? Of course. But the > better the input, the less > degraded the output. > > Cheers > > B. D. > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com