why wasn't a fine grain color PRINT film used? JCO -----Original Message----- From: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Film vs. Digital - A necessary test
Still not entirely honest though you made a better effort than most of the Digital vs Film testers who get published. I think the additional fine detail you see is an artifact of the sharpening process. Still the difference in cost per. print, and the rough equivalence of output is a powerful argument for the digital camera. Gianfranco Irlanda wrote: >William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Subject: Re: P67 vs D1s -- photo.net > > >>He should have chosen the EF50/1.7 and the SMCP 105/2.4 for >> >> >his test. > > >>And he should have gotten a high end optical print made from >> >> >the > > >>film, rather than a scan. >> >> > >Hi everybody, > >About this topic, I performed a film vs. digital test while in Prague. >I shot the same scene with both the LX and the *istD, using the >M 20/4, set at infinity, planning to do a optical print from the >slide film (a Fuji Provia 100F) and a digital (still from a wet >process, though) print from the *istD file. I made a 30x45cm >(12x18'') print from the slide and a 20x30cm (8x12'') from the >*istD file, to have the same magnification and thus comparable >details on the two final prints. >Last step was a couple of 600dpi scans of the buildings (note >that the details are quite small compared to the actual print). >The pictures shown are 100% crops of those details: > >http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=137823 > >I tried to reduce the differences in the colours of the two (the >original *istD file - and print - was a bit more yellowish), to better >show the differences in grain and resolution. The *istD file had also >been modified with a slight sharpening and darkened (still in order to >match more the slide) before printing. >>From what I can see, the *istD image shows a little more fine >details, although there is a certain loss in the saturation of some >colours (the slide was quite dark compared to the digital picture, so >it may have preserved better the colours in the highlights of the >scene). The print from the slide costed me 18 Euros (what is that now, >US$ 23, right?) and the (smaller) print from the file 2 Euros. A >30x45cm print from the file (that I made anyway, with good >results) was 5 Euros (US$ 6.50). >What do you think? > >Ciao, > >Gianfranco > > > >===== >_ > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. >http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > > > -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
