Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/04/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Bob, you realized that B.D. has done a test with B&W wet print vs. HP7960 B&W print and he claims the results are different but comparable right? While I don't do wet prints, my 7960 B&W do look quite gorgeous.... At 09:38 PM 4/27/2005, you wrote: >John, > >I think you have identified exactly what is most important. I have just >been going through a stack of B&W 8x10's of mine from the last three >years, or so. These are just first prints, or file or work prints, but >their quality is just overwhelming -- the detail and the tonal range are >outstanding, and I've never gotten a B&W digital print that is anywhere >near as good. Not from my D70 or from a scanned Leica negative, not even >on my Epson C86 printer with the MIS carbon black and gray inks. The >quality of output of film cameras is just in another orbit from >digital. Your second criterion is even more tilted in favor of film, if >that is possible. No digital camera has the qualities in the hand and up >to the eye that a Leica has, or even a Hexar RF, or a Nikon FM2. This is >very, very important for getting a good picture in the first place. So >the two things go hand in hand and the result is, IMHO, much better >pictures. > >Bob > >>For me two things matter: the quality of the output and the user >>interface. I use M cameras because they suit the way I see period. I am >>only loyal to Leica in that they are the only ones providing what I need. >>99% of my output is projected slide and projected digital is just not >>there yet quality wise. It will get there eventually and, if Leica comes >>out with a M digital, I will seriously weigh the options. For one thing >>present digital projectors, even with their relatively poor quality >>output, are extremely expensive to buy and maintain. Sure film and >>processing are expensive but have you priced out replacement bulbs for >>digital projectors?!! >> >>John Collier >> >>On 27-Apr-05, at 8:35 PM, Don Dory wrote: >> >>>In the almost five years I have been participating on the LUG, there has >>>been a rather dramatic shift in conversation. When I first started >>>paying attention, this was definitely a gear head discussion, we were >>>very interested in Marc's book on LTM lenses, long treatises on small >>>differences in the 50's, scotch religious wars, Tilley hats and more. >>> >>>In the last year the transformation to primarily digital has been >>>profound; actual Leica discussion has dropped to a very minor part. >>>Even film based discussion is a minority. >>> >>>I understand that for many, the tool does not matter. Nathan, B.D., >>>Ted, Tina, Sonny, and many others have made the transition to digital an >>>easy move. Strangely enough, for me, the tool does matter: I get along >>>fine with a variety of cameras and formats but an M or a SL becomes an >>>extension of my eye more so than any other photographic tool. While I >>>respect the need of the professional to streamline workflow, speed up >>>the billing process, or just plain know they have the shot in the bag, I >>>find great joy in going over new negatives or slides; love the >>>serendipity when the combination of chemistry and accident create >>>wonderful images far more that looking at an LCD. >>> >>>So I guess what I am really wondering is, how many of us on the list are >>>somewhat nostalgic for film, or have genuinely embraced the digital >>>revolution? >>> >>>Don >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Leica Users Group. >>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > // richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please use richard at imagecraft.com)