Thread: Film scanners?
View Single Post
  #205  
Old May 12th 17, 10:07 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Film scanners?

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

What is the metric for visual appeal? What is the metric for fun?

fun isn't the issue.


Nope. Not for you. Some of the rest of us do like to enjoy our
hobby, though.

I certainly enjoy digital photography; probably more than I enjoyed
film.

Well, I enjoy photography. Not digital photography. Not film
photography. Just photography. Going out and trying to find a
subject that's interesting and capturing it in an interesting way.
Doesn't make any difference how it's captured.

I also enjoy post-processing digital images and seeing what I can get
from them. I don't do it myself, but I can understand why someone
would enjoy doing the same thing in a darkroom with film.

nospam says fun isn't the issue. I think it's the whole issue. If he
isn't enjoying photography, he should find another hobby.

you're twisting things again, and this isn't about me either.

nospam says the results are better with digital, but "results", for
the hobby photographer is very subjective. What pleases the person
who captures it, is the best result.

missing the point *entirely*.

It is an absolute given that whenever you accuse someone of the
missing the point, the point missed is the point that you are the only
one concerned with.


nope.

the topic is whether digital can duplicate the film look and whether it
can exceed what film can do.


But that is no longer the current point: just read above.

whether someone has fun shooting photos was *never* the issue.


It wasn't the original issue but it has been since I wrote Message-ID:
not far back in the
thread.


that was after tony decided to bash.