Hallo Boz, but than your real world digital camera cannot be more expensive than 1000 � and not 10000 � regards R�diger
>P�l Jensen wrote: >> >> So putting the image through a scanner that cannot do justice to >> the film is considered "real world". With such test procedures you >> can prove anything by simply putting up test procedures that fits >> your preconceived ideas on how things should be. > >If the only possibility to do justice to the film is to scan it at $300 >a frame, then I do not consider that "real world". > >FOR ME and MY WALLET, real world is: > >a) 35 mm slide film, projected >b) 35 mm slide film, scanned on a $1000 scanner, printed on a $300 ink >jet >c) digital image, printed on the $300 ink jet > >So, no, a drum scan is not real-world for me. Neither is chemical >processing of medium format film. YOUR reality may differ... > >Cheers, >Boz >
