Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,993   Posts: 1,524,261   Online: 1001
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,089
    Images
    2
    One question that I would like to arise is people mention digital, will get better, but cant film still get better as well?

    I am not acusing this of being BS but one thing I was reading one this guys site earlier today, and he said a few things I knew to be BS, one was along the lines of 'slide film is hard to get hold of and proccesed now"

    So its 6X7cm v Digi at 2.4X3.6 CM

    So the MF is 1.94r x wider and the same can be said for hight as cropping is needed to keep the ratio the same. so Ignor the 1.94 and lets say the the slide is twice the size or 4x the surface area. ok so that means despite what may look like a hugh difference in size the enlargemnt for the 1Ds is only twice that of the 6x7?

    Depite the grain the 67 does have slightly more res. And you could remove that grain in Neat Image if you really wanted to with very little loss of detail but grain doesn't normally show up so much in prints as on a sceen, does it?
    I had always been led to belive the top Slide films already have more res then any lens can deliver, on an SLR at least.
    So if this is wrong, then why are there no modern ISO 25 slide films???

  2. #12
    Daniel Lawton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    474
    Images
    26
    When you have to blow an image up to extreme levels to see any difference in quality I fail to see the point. High end digital probably does give MF a run for its money and in years to come it will probably compete with LF as well (In terms of resolution). The bottom line however is that we are going beyond the limits of what the human eye can detect. Unless you are making 3x4 foot murals, the extra resolution means little. I prefer the other qualities that film has over digital as well as making the images myself in the darkroom. Almost all of my prints are 11x14 or smaller and a good MF system gives plenty of quality at this print size. No more resolution would make a visible difference in my prints when viewed by the human eye and since I make prints to be viewed by people and not microscopes the author's article doesn't impress me much. They could make a digital camera that resolves 2 million lines and it wouldn't matter at all to me.

  3. #13
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by ajuk
    Depite the grain the 67 does have slightly more res.
    No. The Canon Ds MkII, 16.2MP resolves to 75lpm, Velvia resolves to 160lpm. The limiting factor is still the lens.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  4. #14
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by ajuk
    one was along the lines of 'slide film is hard to get hold of and proccesed now"
    I've never been able to get 4x5 transparencies processed as cheaply as I do now, thanks to Calypso Imaging. And, I had no problem getting 100 4x5 sheets and 20 35mm rolls of Velvia. Luminous Landscape is full of ****.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,089
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by roteague
    No. The Canon Ds MkII, 16.2MP resolves to 75lpm, Velvia resolves to 160lpm. The limiting factor is still the lens.
    So your saying I am wrong because the 6X7 has a lot more res?

    I doubt a 35MM digital camera could never out do large format, the sensor would have to get bigger for that to happen.

    I do think that poeple ditching the MF systems for 35mm digital system is a fad and wil stop when the price of digital backs falls.

  6. #16
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by ajuk
    So your saying I am wrong because the 6X7 has a lot more res?

    I doubt a 35MM digital camera could never out do large format, the sensor would have to get bigger for that to happen.

    I do think that poeple ditching the MF systems for 35mm digital system is a fad and wil stop when the price of digital backs falls.
    Sorry, I mistyped. I believe you are correct. I personally don't believe that a 35mm digital can even out do a 35mm film camera. Resolution is still higher, as is color depth for film.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    I can understand peiple being enthusiastic about what they are doing with their new technology. God bless them. Unfortunately, once they buy into it anyone else must be crazy to do otherwise. Sorta like a photographer buying Camera brand X and those who boughy brand Y are stupid.

    I believ that it will be a long time before one can resolve fine detail with greater clarity than 35mm film with these "35mm" digital camera. Remember going from 75 lpm to 160 lpm..to use Roteagues example.. will require over four time as many pixels
    Claire (Ms Anne Thrope is in the darkroom)

  8. #18
    roteague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Kaneohe, Hawaii
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,672
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Claire Senft
    I believe that it will be a long time before one can resolve fine detail with greater clarity than 35mm film with these "35mm" digital camera. Remember going from 75 lpm to 160 lpm..to use Roteagues example.. will require over four time as many pixels
    There are other issues as well. Remember, each pixel in a digital sensor is only one color (red, green or blue). You have to use software to tell you what the true color should be. With film, you have all three colors (and more) at the same location. Almost everyone of these sites or magazines who try to do a comparison, do so by scanning the film images - the scanning process itself degrades the image (and essentially you are throwing away all the extra sharpness and color that film produces). These people, assume the final image should be a digital one, and use cheap quality scanners in the process (adding another generation). You can mitigate that somewhat, by the scanner you use - I use a Heidelberg Tango; probably the best film scanner made (of course, I don't own one myself).

    As as Joe Cornish points out, film has a physical connection to the scene. Digital only has pixels that are created and deleted everytime the image is copied to a new medium.
    Robert M. Teague
    www.visionlandscapes.com
    www.apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=2235

    "A man who works with his hands is a laborer; a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman; a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist" -- Louis Nizer

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arlington, Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    467
    Read this and give your Hasselblad a hug *and* a kiss!

    http://kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm

    Robert

  10. #20
    gnashings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,376
    Images
    17
    I think that the discipline that should be most concerned with Luminous Landscapes is psychology (perhaps psychiatry), not photography. This guy is a zealot and blisters with so many insecurities he could keep a dozen therapists in business. Why this constant need to justify yourself? You like your digital camera - good for you and your flea market quality landscrapes (I've seen them - nothing to write home about). If you are really so sure of your position, good for you - is anyone shoving a film camera in your hands?
    And on top of that, its just humorous when someone puts in a huge disclaimer to stop people from making comments without real data AND quantifying that statement by saying that:
    a) real data is only data obtained in a test much like the one he performed
    b) "no numbers of formulae" - I am sure NASA just called up the guys who walked on the moon before them, so as not to rely on numbers and silly formulae...
    c) "don't send me opinions without backing..." from a man who dismisses the entire POINT of the picture taking process - the print - with an off-hand "I don't want to hear it, ink-jet is better and that's that." As well as someont already mentioned "I don't do them (wet prints) therefore they suck"...

    Not to mention that the drum scan - which is still a SCAN - shows me no visible adventage to the digital image. And complaining about the dust... well, complain to the lab, not the medium...

    And then there is still black and white photography...

    I think this Digital Goebbels needs his little propaganda speeches to boost his opinion of himself by justifing his choices - he should drag his ass to the nearest drug store and get some Viagra, or maybe stop repressing some childhood trauma, whatever it is that makes him so ... maybe he would be less bitter and insecure...

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin