DelRosario, Tom wrote:
I have never read anyone make the argument that scanned film = digital. For
example, the original question was when will a digital camera be superior to
a 35 mm camera. You are now saying that scanning film is the equivalent to
a digital camera, therefore you can't make the comparison.
However, from what I have read around the Net, it seems that many people
believe that the best way to get prints is not from traditional optical
enlargement, but from high-quality scanning and high-quality printing (such
as the LightJet). But to then state that scanning film is the same as
digital is unique.
Anyway, to answer the original poster's question, read
www.luminous-landscape.com/d60.htm. There is a comparison between D30, D60,
35 mm, 645 and 6x7.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Simple Tom, in the end the result you see is in each case produced from a
digital file. One is from the camera the other from a scan. Granted you
will gain more information from the film when properly scanned but the
result in doing so is digital.
Yes, there are better means to print than traditional, but doing so again
requires the Analog media of film to be transformed to a digital file in
order to accomplish this.
Peter K
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
