Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 03:38 PM 12/15/2002 -0500, bdcolen wrote: >Robert - >1. Off 100 people viewing a shot of a horse race, how many do you think >have ever noticed the "fine stitching" in the jockey's jackets? For that >matter, of 100 photographers shooting such a scene, how many know - or >care - that the detail is there until they look at a huge enlargement? >Bottom line - does the digital capture the scene? Does it capture the >color "accurately?" Does it capture light and shadow? Does it capture >the action? Does it give the same impression, when viewed from a normal >viewing distance, that film does? After all, NO ONE is looking at such a >photo with a loupe other than someone trying to see what fine detail the >film was capable of resolving. I was just asking if the bayer pattern is the cause of the loss of fine detail in red. >2. You've got to be kidding when you say the digital workflow takes >longer than the film workflow. >"I develop them by machine, edit on a light table and >throw out the rejects. I can view a slide in a few seconds using a >loupe. Opening a file, closing it and then deleting it probably >averages >to ten or fifteen seconds each file." > >So you're saying you take a processing machine to the venue? And wait >how long for the slides to be processed, dried, and mounted before you >throw them on the light table - that you also took to the venue? As >opposed to the "ten to fifteen seconds" it "probably averages" to view >each digital image and decide if it's a keeper - which can be done on >the camera if one is so inclined. And if one isn't, it's sure easier >carrying a laptop to the race track than it is transporting a slide >processing outfit, film drier, mounts, and a lightbox. And then, >assuming that you want to make some color or white balance adjustments >in those slides you've thrown on the lightbox, how do you do it - unless >you're printing - and how long does it take? I said not on a tight deadline. Which means it can wait until they get developed by normal means. >Come on. If you want to say that you think film is superior because it >captures that fine detail - and you have a need for that fine detail - >okay. If you want to say you prefer the latitude film gives you, okay. >If you want to say that you prefer to use your Leicas and Leica glass, >and that you can't use them to shoot digitally, fine. But don't claim >that shooting digitally slows people down - because it just ain't so. >:-) We are talking different worlds. If you are not in a rush, you shoot the film, send it all to the editor and let them deal with it. With digital, you still have to move the images around. I am still shooting film too. Shot a few years ago on E200 using the 180 APO Summicron at F2. I think I overdid it on the saturation though. http://www.robsteve.com/images/SportsShooter/Laroque.jpg Shot tonight with the 400mm APO-Telyt @ f2.8 and mounted to the EOS 1D http://www.robsteve.com/images/SportsShooter/TC31.jpg Look the the detail in the red stockings. Look at the in focus knee of each player with red stockings. What do you think? Regards, Robert >B. D. >Still shooting film. > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Robert G. >Stevens >Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 1:57 PM >To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us >Subject: RE: [Leica] 1Ds digital results > > >At 12:29 PM 12/15/2002 -0500, you wrote: > >Wilfred, > > > > > White balance and overall color fidelity is often > > > superior to film in good digital cameras, > > > >I believe you are misusing the word "fidelity". Fidelity means > >"accuracy of reproduction". It is physically impossible for digital > >cameras using Bayer pattern sensors to have higher "fidelity" than film > > >(unless they have a LOT of sensors, and 11M sensors doesn't come > >close), simply because of the color interpolation that happens due to > >the Bayer pattern sensor. > >I have noticed that images shot with digital seem to be missing some of >the >finer detail captured on slide film. I am assuming it is this color >interpolation doing it. I borrowed an EOS 1D to shoot some hockey this >weekend. When shot at 400asa the details in the material of the jerseys > >seem to be missing. Using the same lens, E200 pushed to EI 400 seems >to >capture more details in the Jerseys, such as the fine stiching. It is >really noticable with the red jerseys. > >Look at the sample image on the EOS 1D web page. In the Jockey picture >the >red jersey has no detail, just a blob of red. Its a big tiff file and >takes a while to download. > >http://www.usa.canon.com/EOS-1D/sample.html > >I would also argue that digital adds a lot to the work flow for somebody > >that is not on a tight deadline. Shooting at 8fps and high quality >creates >a lot of files that take a lot of time to open and decide whether to >delete >or keep. With slides, I develop them by machine, edit on a light table >and >throw out the rejects. I can view a slide in a few seconds using a >loupe. Opening a file, closing it and then deleting it probably >averages >to ten or fifteen seconds each file. > >Not to mention dragging a laptop to the venue to download the images and > >start some of the editing. One more thing to carry. > >Regards, > >Robert > > > > > >Now, the color may LOOK better/cleaner etc. to some, but that is not > >something you can attribute to "fidelity". > > > > > Negative film can still capture a wider range of light than any > > > non-scanning digital sensor I've seen or read about thus far. > > > >Hum. What are the ranges you are seeing? My information shows they > >are equal, with an edge on digital, especially for color. For B&W, > >they are the same, pretty much, but you have to use compression and > >compensating development to get that many stops on the film...but it is > > >do-able. > > > >Regards, > > > >Austin > > > >-- > >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 > >-- >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