Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:44:33 -0600
From: "Bill Pearce" <bspearce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I still maintain that comparing a print from a digital camera with a
print
from a film scan (inkjet or on photo paper), is not valid. Make a
GOOD WET
PRINT from that 6x7 chrome, and compare it to a print from the
digital.
That's a valid comparison, as the print from the scan has an
additional step
inserted.
If you had seen some of the digital prints from 35mm in the Galen
Rowell gallery in Bishop, California I don't think you would say that.
Here is a guy who could afford to have his prints made the best way
possible($10,000 a pop for prints of some of the images) and digital
printing was chosen because it was, for him, superior to chemical
prints. I was awestruck standing in front of the beautiful 30 by 42
inch prints from 35mm because of the quality of some of them. Certainly
it was obvious that the limits on them were with the photographer and
his 35mm equipment not the printing. It is an eye opening experience.
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California, USA
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|