Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/05/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 18:27:18 -0500
References: <BLU124-DS1C4C5B86A87C431DF5A93D44F0@phx.gbl> <C6482121.4F42E%mark@rabinergroup.com> <7ac27f4f0905311325s24f0e4c7y65439c8fa378a16d@mail.gmail.com>
 
no fight here
just asking for
and offering
information based on
experience with gear.

totally agree
that each film or sensor
provides a different aesthetic

and with film different still
depending on whether scanned
or traditionally enlarged.

for creative work
digital has not "killed" film
simply added additional creative possibilities.

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist

On May 31, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Richard Man wrote:

> Why are we fighting the digital vs. film war again? :-)
In reply to: Message from leicar at q.com (Aram Langhans) ([Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples)
Message from richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] OT: D3x vs. 'Blad CFV 16MP full sized samples)