> It's not a pissing match, Rob ... it's a strong disagreement.
I don't know what it is, Shel, since you seem to be unable to
express yourself in a sensible, non-belligerently ignorant
fashion.
> > From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Direct digital captured images don't look like anything,
they are as close to
> > neutral as we can currently achieve if processed by someone
with an
> > understanding of limitations of the media. Without getting
into a pissing match
> > or speaking for Godfrey I expect the point that was being
made is that digital
> > imaging should not impose its own noise/transfer fingerprint
on the image
> > unlike film. (And I'm not referring to in camera image
processing either, just
> > like you aren't referring to an instant film process.)
That's correct, Rob has it just about right. A quality digital
camera used correctly does a clean job of recording a photograph
without creating defects in the rendering. How the photograph is
textured/rendered is up to the judgement of the photographer.
Godfrey
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
