Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/03/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The digital B&W works very well for me. But so does most of your work ;-) Thanks for showing, Philippe Op 27-mrt-07, om 12:47 heeft Daniel Ridings het volgende geschreven: > Frank and Didier, > > I usually don't get too involved in these discussions. I guess when > it comes right down to it, I really don't care. I use digital and I > use film, for different reasons. I like them both. > > But playing around with Lightzone as I have been doing recently, I > have a shot last week with film: > > http://www.dlridings.se/gallery/v/Shoebox/2007v12/07v12-0002.jpg.html > > And from the same sitting, one with digital: > > http://www.dlridings.se/gallery/v/Shoebox/2007v13/DSC_8674.jpg.html > > I see now that the digital is too "low key". I need to brighten it > up a bit and do the color conversion intelligently rather than lazily. > > Daniel > > > Didier Ludwig wrote: >> Frank >> There's nothing to argue about what you say. Digital has passed >> film in terms of resolution and dynamic range since several years; >> except you produce zone-system-exposed, tripod based, ISO25 large >> format shots as you mentioned. All I want to add is that, >> sometimes, I have the feeling that the screened or printed scans >> of my b&w (mostly 100, 125 and 400 ASA) small format negatives >> have another patina, another texture, just "another look" than my >> digital pix from the R-D1. I've tried many PS hacks but could not >> imitate this effect so far. Because i still like that "look". >> Younger people, like my graphic design students, call it >> "retro" (but they like it, too, though they'd never have the >> patience, or passion, to fiddle around with it). >> Didier >>> Hi Jerry, >>> your statement is miles from my experience. >>> Digital is MUCH better than film for everything I do. In fact I >>> would say that unless you use slow hi res B&W film and your >>> camera is always on a tripod the potential extra resolution of >>> film (its only theoretical benefit over digital, it is already >>> inferior in every other way) will never be actually visible/ >>> useable. >>> Frank >>> >>> >>> On 26 Mar, 2007, at 23:31, Photo Phreak wrote: >>> >>>> Digital is convenient, but the quality is still not equal to film. > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >