Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Digital is not photography (long)
From: Johnny Deadman <>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:35:16 -0500

on 30/10/00 5:44 pm, at wrote:

> An 8x10 film has the equivelent of around (at 4000DPI) 32,000
> x 40,000 pixels, or 1,280,000,000 bytes, depending on the lense
> you used... unless you were talking color, then at 8 bits/color
> that would be 3,840,000,000.  So, you're right in the ball part
> when you say 2G.  Obviously, all this depends on the film, film
> speed, development and exposure conditions.

One of the interesting things about large format photography is that the
costs don't scale up in quite the way you do when you consider the digital
parallels. I mean, you can pick up 4x5 gear pretty cheap and for certain
kinds of image that's going to deliver massively more information than
anything digital at the same or similar price point for a long time to come.
Also there is no doubt in my mind that an 8x10 contact print has an 'aura'
that the equivalent digital image might lack. It's so close to the basics of
photography. This is nothing to do with quality... it's almost metaphysical.
I know a lot of folks on this list think I'm a diginut but I'm not, even if
E Puts likes to have a straw man to burn. All this is precisely why the
hybrid approach is so nice, because you can pick and choose the best bits of
both eg Leica (back on topic!). Long live digital AND silver.
- -- 
Johnny Deadman