A couple of days ago a friend and I were talking about the rather convoluted workflow some of us go through at times. We buy good quality cameras, the highest quality lenses we can afford, test and retest film looking for that which gives the finest grain and highest resolution and detail, and then scan the film using, at best, mediocre scanners (sometimes at rather low resolution), run the mess through photo editing software to correct and enhance lost color and sharpness, destroying even more of the original negative, and then print the mess on an inkjet printer (sometimes purchased with low price paramount to highest quality) or send it to a lab somewhere that'll make a print cheaply - sometimes even via FTP or email - where the techs have no idea what the final result is supposed to look like, and, bada-bing, we have the modern photograph. What's wrong with this picture? <LOL>
Shel > [Original Message] > From: Bob Blakely > Ain't film wonderful! the grain is entirely random! No anti-aliasing filter > required! FYI, anti-aliasing filters are not like the ubiquitous UV filter. > By their nature, they must add minor, shall we say, distortions to perform > their function. > > Regards, > Bob... > ------------------------------------------------ > "A picture is worth a thousand words, > but it uses up three thousand times the memory." > > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > On 14 May 2005 at 8:21, Bob W wrote: > > > >> AA filter? Does that prevent Leica photographers taking photos like Ansel > >> Adams? > >> > >> If not, what actually is an AA filter? > > > > Anti-Aliasing > > > > http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/a/an/anti-aliasing.htm
