Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/07/27

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Slides or prints?
From: "Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:50:23 +0200
References: <3B61EAF7.296A91B9@tibco.com>

Slides eliminate one generation and have better image-capture characteristics
than photographic paper.  A print can never be better than the film from which
it was produced, but a slide can certainly be better than any print produced
from it.

In particular, if you are going to spend a king's ransom on Leica glass, the
least you can do is use the best possible image capture behind, and slide film
is lightyears ahead of prints, and even far ahead of negative film.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Satish Kumar Krishnamurthy" <satishk@tibco.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 00:28
Subject: [Leica] Slides or prints?


>
> OK, I hope I am not starting off another contentious debate here :-)
>
> I would like to know what you use/recommend, slides or prints, and what
> the advantages and disadvantages of each of these as you see it are.  I
> have never used slides (yet), only regular print film (but then, I am no
> photography expert).  The research I have done so far (yes, I actually
> did search on this before posting!) did not give me as much information
> as I would have liked, but seemed to lean towards slides.  Here is a
> quote from
> www.summitlake.com/COMPUTERS_NET/Slide_Scanning/section_014.html (in
> case you were wondering how I got to that page, that was one of the top
> links from Google for the search
> www.google.com/search?q=photo+slides+prints+advantages+disadvantages):
> "Best of all, photography professionals still seem to pretty much agree
> that the very best photos are captured on slide film."
> Is that right?
>
> Regards,
> Satish
>

In reply to: Message from Satish Kumar Krishnamurthy <satishk@tibco.com> ([Leica] Slides or prints?)