Manuel Viet wrote:
> Le mercredi 04 Octobre 2006 16:58, Chuck Norcutt a écrit :
>> AG Schnozz wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, the only one I hear these complaints from is you. Here's the 3MP
>> D30 vs a high quality Imacon 3200 dpi scan of a Provia shot. Both look
>> fine to me and pretty much equivalent. What small differences I see are
>> of the same type that I might relate to a different type of film.
>> <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d30/d30_vs_film.shtml>
>>
>> I think your "positional" argument for film doesn't hold water. Things
>> on film are positioned no more accurately than the size of the film
>> grains which are actually pretty large. The analog nature of film
>> begins to break down right there.
>
> I disagree ; when I look at both pictures, clearly the digital one looks to
> me
> flatter than the film one. In fact, I agree that when you just look at
> details, both are equivalent, but when you look at the full frame, the film
> image gives a better sense of volumes : the EDS letters, the ribs on the
> white blob, they're all much better looking on film. This is a feeling that's
> not resolution related, obviously.
Hmmm, I wonder if the increased contrast in the Provia shot is
influencing your perception. An increase in contrast can produce the
illusion of dimensional-depth.
Richard L
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|