Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/08/01

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica Quality versus Medium Format
From: Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 17:04:06 -0400
References: <FJEAJICBHEDNLMABPNCPAEOCCCAA.george@rdcinteractive.com>

At 07:07 PM 8/1/01 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote:
>I'm not sure what industry you have in mind, but it has been the years I've
>spent in photography that taught me how prevalent 35mm is, and now digital is
>becoming very prevalent, too.  Some old-world editors may still prefer MF,
but
>since MF quality cannot be reproduced on even the best magazine covers, it
is a
>pointless anachronism.

Well, such quality CAN be reproduced on even the best magazine covers, if
they choose to invest the money in process work.  But most magazine
illustrations, cover and inside, are now digitally generated, so your basic
proposition -- that the quality IS lost -- stands.

Marc

msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bąs fir gun ghrąs fir!

In reply to: Message from "George Day" <george@rdcinteractive.com> (RE: [Leica] Leica Quality versus Medium Format)