Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It has to do with level of expertise, Luis. Someone who is really good in the PS 'darkroom' can achieve, in less time and with far more consistency, as much or more in terms of control than can be achieved in the wet darkroom. BUT, as I just said in another post, that doesn't mean that an inkjet print is "better" than a good fiber print. On 1/15/06 9:02 AM, "Luis Ripoll" <luisripoll@telefonica.net> wrote: > Jonathan, > > Yes, this is true, with the Photoshop you can adjust the curves best than > in > a traditional darkroom, but I've never reach - probable because I don't > have > the expertise - the same dodge and burning techniques in Photoshop, as well > the differences on paper gradations. > > Is this an expertise default?, or I'm right? > > Saludos desde Barcelona > Luis > > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org]En nombre de > Jonathan Borden > Enviado el: domingo, 15 de enero de 2006 14:51 > Para: Leica Users Group > Asunto: Re: [Leica] re: digital treadmill > > B. D. Colen wrote: >> >> I find that digital gives me an image by image, rather than roll by >> roll, >> choice of color v black and white. I was never particularly fond of >> color >> negative film, and wasn't thrilled with conversions to black and >> white. >> Digital, on the other hand, gives me better color, far, far more >> easily >> adjusted and balanced, and gives me black and whites that look like >> what I >> shot on black and white film. > > This is certainly true as well for film scanned to digital -- I had > the same misconception or bias against color film until recently. > With the ability to scan and adjust curves in Photoshop the final > output quality of a B/W inkjet print (at least in my hands) bests the > quality of a B/W fiber print. Inkjet prints can be made with long- > lasting carbon inks that have blacks as deep or deeper than the best > of silver gelatin. I daresay that you would have a hard time telling > the origin of such a print as from a B/W or color negative. > >> >> No, I'm not thrilled with the noise in shadows, but I'm getting >> used to it. >> I know that there are those who say 'why get used to it when you >> can use >> film?' And the answer is "because it is part of what is now main >> stream >> photography." If I was really bothered by it, I'd go with Canon >> and get >> smoother, cleaner results at iso 1600 than I got with the best 400 >> iso film. >> But I'm not all that thrilled with the overly clean Canon look - >> probably >> because I grew up on Tri-X. >> >> Now, am I as comfortable with my DSLR as I was with my M6s? No, I'm >> not. I >> love the feel of the Ms. I love the rangefinder framing. And there is >> absolutely no question that the latest Leica M glass had virtually >> no peers. >> That said, my DSLR is every bit as quiet as my M6, and I do like its >> ergonomics. The lenses? Some are up to Leica quality, some aren't. >> But all >> give me images that I can be proud of as frequently as my Ms did. > > What keeps me with the M6 (at least for the next year) is a couple of > factors: > > 1) the quality/size ratio -- you can compare an M6/film image against > a DSLR but compact digital cameras don't really approach the image > quality of an M6 and film. > 2) the dynamic range of film gives CCD sensors a run for their money > -- it is agreed that full frame sensor cameras do a terrific job but > they are large "beasts" compared to the M6 -- that said the 5D is > tempting if it weren't for my anticipation of the digital M. > >> >> So am I giving up something to get something? Yes, I suppose I am. >> I'm given >> up the feel of the Ms - and I am giving up those fast prime lenses; >> I've >> never been a zoom guy, and I've had to adapt to that. But life is >> about >> tradeoffs, so why wouldn't I expect photography to be? >> >> The bottom line, as always, is the results. And I'm willing to be >> that were >> I not now known as the ultimate Leica apostate ;-), I could be >> posting the >> black and white images I've been posting, telling everyone I shot >> them with >> my M6, and no one would question me. >> >> Finally, none of this means that someone else shouldn't be shooting >> film. If >> it does what you want it to do, and if money isn't an object - and >> if you >> don't have to turn results around quickly - why not keep shooting >> film until >> there's no film to shoot? > > We've reached the point where it is rather hard to beat the "digital > darkroom" in terms of quality -- I am using the new Epson K3 series > of printers namely the 4800. The time to give up film will be when a > high quality digital sensor can be married with the form factor of an M. > > Jonathan > > _______________________________________________ > 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