On 7/1/2014 3:33 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , James Silverton
wrote:

only the medium on which it's stored is different.

Until viewed.

if someone put a print made from a digital camera and a print made from
a film camera in front of you, you would not be able to tell which was
which (assuming the digital image was reduced in quality to look like
film).

That is NOT the issue.

yes it is.

I am interested in the idea that digital prints and film prints cannot
be distinguished. Just how do you intend to make the prints?

with a printer. how did you think they'd be made?

I'd think
that those from wet chemistry and those from a digital printer could
easily be told apart, especially under a magnifying lens since there
would be discrete dots for the digital printer and irregular colored
areas from the wet process.

depends on the printer used.

if you use the same printer for both, that takes the printer variable
out of the equation.

you do realize that film prints are now done digitally, don't you?

and this isn't about pixel peeping anyway. even if you use a good
inkjet printer and wet chemistry, the viewer will still not be able to
tell which is which.

I'm not sure that I believe that but I suppose a negative can scanned
digitally and then printed with a digital printer. I did that a little
when I first started using a digital editing program. I must try to find
the files and have a careful look.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.