Hi Heiko, Just a few quick notes...
> I've just read it. I just read all of it too. > I think, that Michael is right, when he says that the digital > workflow is better for him. It is faster and the results are > perfect to a certain paper size. These are my thoughts too. > BUT - this comparisons has some inconsistencies: Keep in mind, and he says it a few times, he is comparing real-world results. > - he chooses not the finest grained film but complains about grain > - he compares about dust - but wirh ICE on a Nikon Coolscan 8000ED > dust is no longer a problem Still, the difference is so dramatic, that I imagine choosing the "right" film will still have very little effect in the comparisson. As to the ICE technology, I have not kept my knowledge current, but articles about 6 months old were suggesting that while dust is gone, so is sharpness and contrast... > - the same picture is compared to a 67 picture at a different > magnification > - most important (for me): the drum scan shows, that the 67 picture > is much better than the Imacon scans that he uses for his comparison. Both of these points have to so with the "real world" thesis. Are you willing to pay EUR 200 for a drum scan? Will you often make enlargements over 1 meter? > Again: I'm impressed of the digital results and I would probably > prefer the digital system because of its easier workflow. But the > framework of this comparison is determined by digital technologies > and it tells nothing about the capabilities of a Pentax 67. Actually, it does, to a big extent. Pure resolution is not the whole story. Getting the picture on paper or to your editor is the key, and overall digital seems to win. Just look at the shelves of most "pro" photo stores. What you see is medium-format equipment (new or used) at record low prices. And this seems to tell the story. Now, I myself am not going away from film, not soon. Even if I can get great 50x75 digital prints, I can still not see my slides lighting up a large white wall... And until my computer monitor scales up to that size, I will likely still use print film (along with digital). Cheers, Boz
