I subscribe to a periodical that notes the type of image that is presented, either film or digital. In a number of cases, this has made for an illuminating comparison. I have noted that almost invariably the film shots--all of which have been with Kodachrome--always look blurry in comparison to the digital shots. The Kodacrome, overall, looks blurry, and seems to lack shadow detail and resolution, too. Observing the dates, some images were taken as far back as the 70s and 80s, while others are fairly contemporary. Why do the Kodachrome images look rather poor in comparison to the digital shots? This question is not meant to bring about a film vs. digital debate. I am simply trying to "get to the bottom" of this matter. I notice that the digital shots look very similar to my shots, which are shot on 35mm film (either Kodak or Fuji pro film), and then scanned and printed at a pro lab.

Thus, what is the issue here? Does Kodachome look less sharp and clear in magazine printing? Does the problem stem from some shortcoming in optical processing? Was the film itself an issue? I doubt it could be an issue with the photographer, as I have noted this blurry tendency in numerous shots, taken by different photographers. I welcome your comments and observations, as I am now thinking that perhaps the wonderful sharpness and resolution I see in my 35mm film/digitally printed shots is a mostly a result of the digital prinitng aspect.