Rob Studdert wrote:
On 30 Apr 2005 at 13:09, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Methinks this is a bogus comparison. Herb is comparing the results of scanned film to original digital output. In another post Godfrey is comparing the results of scanned film to original digital output. Once the image on a piece of film has been scanned, it's degraded. The pixels react with the film grain, the quality of the scanner and the quality of the scan come into play as well. The skill of the person doing the scan enters the equation, as does the quality of other hardware and software along the chain to the final print or output. Then there's the conversion of the scanned image into a JPEG for web use or other use. It's not a realistic comparison.
How about comparing the digital output that has been adjusted and printed to a properly exposed and carefully processed original film image that has been reproduced directly to, for example, an Ilfochrome or a high quality optical print, or viewed as a slide.
I just makes me smile, and sometimes laugh aloud, to see how many people
degrade their film images by scanning them on mediocre scanners (and the
high end Nikon, Minolta, and other consumer brands generally used here and
by most people who do their own scanning are mediocre and pale in
comparison to the Heidelberg Tango and Imacon scanners) and then compare
the results to what is essentially original digital output.
It seems to me that in your argument you assume that every analogue print is made with the best lens between the film and the paper on a very stable well aligned enlarger which has good illumination consistency. Not all analogue print processes are idea either even with the operator removed from the equation. Scan and print using top equipment and an appropriate process you'll get equivalent results to good analogue process and equipment. I've seen more crap analogue prints from reputable labs in my time than great ones.
And getting ahead of myself, for get slide projection, get with it, this ancient practice is only resurrected during camera club competition nights. No friends of mine would tolerate an evening of me subjecting them to a slide night, they will however flick though a couple of hundred digital image in front of my monitor, and often request prints.
Maybe it's just a generational gap but I really can't see what all the fuss is about, the pro-sumer digital capture to print process even at this stage is equal to any average analogue process and IMHO will exceed the best analogue process capabilities in a short time.
Cheers,
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Interesting, my parents would probably sit through a projected slide show presentation more so than they can handle viewing images on a monitor...
There will always be a generation gap,
C�sar Panama City, Florida
