This comparison MUST have been arranged to come down in favour of digital. The way to make a print from a 35mm original is optically via an enlarger. either Cibachrome or RA4. Shooting tranny for scanning and output via inkjet printer may well provide a comparison with digital but anyone wanting a print would use neg anyway !!! When I scan 35mm at 4000 ppi on my drum scanner all I'm really seeing is how much grain there is. I believe that higher scanner resolution does not harvest more information,after all if its not there,its not there. I've made 5x4 negs on our film recorder from supplied 1 mb files and printed them up to 30x20". They are wonderfully smooth and you would simply look and comment how nice they looked But when you look for micro detail there is none, Likewise I've produced similar images originated on the PhaseOne scan back which also look superb When the images are viewed side by side from a reasonable distance there is ,to the untrained eye, very little difference. Close up is another matter. Comparisons at conferences must be transparently fair because when all the oohing and aahing is over people talk,when they talk they find fault,when they find fault they spread the news and the news is that they are buls*****g again.
Regards Michael Wilkinson. 106 Holyhead Rd, Ketley, Telford, Shropshire. England .TF1 5DJ 44 (0) 1952 618986. www.infocus-photography.co.uk For transparencies from digital files ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Schewe" > But, to further the discussion about digital capture (although not at a low > end) my presentation (given in Apple's Keynote I might add) was a side by > side comparison of digital capture from a Canon 1Ds and film from an EOS 1. > > Side by side, exact same lens & crop. Digital processed through an un-named > beta of a soon to be announced raw image conversion (in 6 seconds from > preview on a 1gig Ti Laptop using OS X) and up-rezed in stages to the same > size as the 35mm chrome scanned on an Imacon 848 at 6700ppi. (film was EPP) > > Result? Film sucks. . .badly! > > Digital from the 1Ds had more resolution-even after uprez, had more accurate > color rendering, at least 1-1.5 stops dynamic range, more accurate ISO and > all around beat the panties off the film. =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
