On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Herb Chong wrote: > Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Bill has a point, think of it like this, your scan is > a 2nd generation copy, and therefore not as accurate > as the original.< > > as if a print isn't. > > Herb....
That's not the point here. Comparing a print made from a digital scan of a negative with a print made from a digital file captured by a digital camera is comparing a 2nd generation copy with a first generation one, which is hardly a valid process. You have negative-->digital file-->print versus digital file-->print. If you compare prints from the digital camera file and from a negative, you're at least comparing the same generation of copies: digital file-->print versus negative-->print. Sure, an enlarger will affect the print in some way, but that's the whole point of this comparison... to see how a traditionally produced wet print compares to a digitally produced print. chris
