Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/04/29

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

Subject: RE: Vs: [Leica] Digital vs Film
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 09:30:27 -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;

Hi B.D.,

I think there are circumstances where digital is better suited.  I actually
plan on getting a 35mm-esque digital camera sometime in the next few
years...simply for happy snaps.  That's it though.  I still plan on using my
"contemplative cameras" (Hasselblad, Rollei, Leica) for, mostly B&W, work
that I will want to print perhaps a few "precious" images from.

Also, for commercial work, it makes sense too...but for B&W "art" work, not
at all.

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

Yes and no.  If you want double prints from all you pictures, where are you
going to get them?  Print them out one at a time on your inkjet?  How about
all that time spend downloading them, archiving them, and putzing with them
in PS?  I agree, some time in the near future, digital will be a lot easier
to print (which is the current time sink with respect to digital), but right
now...I still believe in some applications (like family happy snaps), film
still is much faster.

Regards,

Austin

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