Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/28

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

Subject: RE: Vs: [Leica] Digital vs Film
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 09:57:48 -0400

Austin wrote...

Right, but how does that preclude using and then scanning...film?  Whether
your source is digital camera or scanned film, the printing process is
identical.

Personally, the ideal workflow is to use film, scan it, and print digitally.
I get all the advantages of both, and almost none of the disadvantages.

- ---

Austin, as you know, that is my present workflow. But it may not be for much
longer: Consider the time and work involved in scanning, as compared to
simply downloading images from camera to computer; consider how much less
work is involved in preparing the images for printing - I know, I know, you
never use photo shop etc. etc., but a lot of us spend as much time with
photoshop and an image as we would spend working in the darkroom; consider
the elimination of film and processing costs; consider the fact that one can
be out of town, shoot a job during the day, and make image selections, and
do the photoshop work on a laptop in one's hotel room and send jpgs of the
images to the client within hours of the shoot.

I'm not going to argue with you - of all people - about the detail captured
by a Leica, Zeiss - or even Nikon or Canon lens - and film, as compared to
digital. (but one does have to consider how the resulting image is going to
be used - if it's going to end up in a newspaper, that detail is a total
waste. And even if it's going to end up in a high quality photo book, we're
still talking about, what, 300 dpi prints?)

But when you start to consider time and money, digital has it all over film
at this point.

B. D.



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html