I shoot digital, and I shoot film, both 35mm and medium format. I know
how much detail I lose over 35mm when I shoot digital, just as I know
how much detail I lose shooting 35mm vs medium format. If he's happy
with digital, (APS), converted to negatives then made into platinum
prints, that's fine for him. I feel sorry for him. If you can't tell
the difference, I feel sorry for you. Enough said.
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Jan 19, 2006, at 9:01 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
I have seen cyanotype and platinum/paladium prints, they're even
better if the source image is exceptional, such as an 4x5 or 8x10
plate.
This gentleman's source material was exceptional. All of it, whether
film or digital negative from other sources. He explicitly showed
originals, negatives and positives, in demonstrating the process.
How is it that you can debate with such assurance against the quality
of something that you haven't even seen and therefore have no ability
to judge with any credibility?
Godfrey
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
