There are so many analogies that could be used. I remember when daisy wheel printers were being supplanted by NLQ 24-pin dot matrix printers. We viewed NLQ as an apology -- they were only Near Letter Quality. But it was good enough for the buyers, so it ended up being good enough for the sellers.
Likewise with CDs vs. vinyl. CD wins in the marketplace even though I would much rather listen to Herb Alpert, Sergio Mendes, or the Mills Brothers on vinyl. The highs, the timber of the music, is so much better in analog. What does that men to chemical vs digital? Though the analogy breaks down, I do acknowledge the clear advantages of each. In digital it is oh, so nice to be able to apply the "magenta" in the desired quantity after-the-fact. No need to guess on the filter before the shot, and no need to guess on how many filtered frames to shoot, and how fast, as the lighting changes every moment, always hoping that my red-filtered shot catches the same image that the orange-filtered and yellow-filtered shot caught. It can be a headache. But with (LF) film I can burn in details that as yet do not exist in digital. The texture of brushed leather and denim (noting the portrait link I put up yesterday) still is not the same, though I suspect 40mp is going to start getting pretty close ... So just as a daisy wheel qualitatively beats a dmp every time, it is the market which determines success, but not quality. Same with the sound of the LP. And the same with the fine detail on a chemical neg. None of them are perfect, but they are all good. (I believe there is good reason for medium and large format people to drum-scan their Fuji reversals. It's the best of both worlds.) Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
