Thread: Film scanners?
View Single Post
  #112  
Old April 21st 17, 02:30 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Film scanners?

In article , -hh
wrote:


Thank you for your respect of the craft. But I don't find it hard (maybe
because I don't use a "bathroom darkroom"!), and a well printed, mounted
and framed enlargement gives me a sense of achievement.

Fair enough, but it's not the process I disagree with, it's the
claimed output quality of the process.


same here.

digital can do everything film can do and a whole lot more.


Case in point, I happened to see yesterday a digital photo that the customer
has requested be sent through the public release process to use it for
marketing.

I'll have to obfuscate the subject until it does get released, but suffice to
day that from a camera technology standpoint, the result was a really nice
image with good colors, good saturation levels, and obviously of high
dynamic range, as the shadows were dark but not too terribly harsh, mids
were excellent and the highlight was a bit overexposed, but in context was
really an excellent job of not being blown out. Once the image is released,
you'll better understand what I'm saying.

The kicker to all of this was that it was an outdoor photo on a "Sunny 16"
day, with zero artificial lighting ... and a shutter speed of 1mSec,

If/when the image gets approved for public release, I'll provide a URL link.


BUT...in any event, while I understand nospam's sentiment of "always better",


i didn't say digital is always better.

i said whatever 'film look' someone might want can be done with
digital, and with less fuss/expense/etc.

there is no 'look' that film can do that digital cannot.

not only that, but one can decide which film look to use *after* the
fact and change it at any time, for any reason.

this is really a fallacy which once one understands the base condition, not
only is not actually true, but it can never be true.

The base condition is two different systems...here, imaging technologies.
That means that by definition, they respond differently to various stimuli.


that does not matter.

what matters is that digital can do anything film can do (and more).

And it also means that the definition of "best" is a personal judgement, as
generally derived from varying weighting factors on the different metrics.


best isn't the issue.

producing the *same* results as film is (or going beyond).

Since there must be differences, and since these differences are being
quasi-quantified by opinion-driven metrics, what it really comes down to
is that it always depends on the weighting values being assigned by the
individual human ... which is what we commonly call a personal preference.

TL;DR: "its a personal preference, and always has to be, and will be".


the *look* is a preference, except a particular look was never the
issue.