"richardsfault" wrote in message
...

Could the difference between film and digital not only be megapixels
but the "look" in a vauge sense?

If any of you are guitar players, you know that it is widely believed
that tubes are superior in guitar amplifiers. They may not be as good
as solid state based on hard measurments, but they may be better
sounding or more pleasing to the ear, with that advantage very likely
resulting from a technical inferiority, i.e., "good" distrortion.

Does anyone see an analogy where film might in some cases have a more
pleasing look?
I agree, and have used in the past the analogy of CD vs Vinyl - CD is
technically better, but vinyl has that distinct sound that (to my ear
anyway) just sounds better. Valve's introduce more noise which is noticeable
at low amplification, and they have a different clip pattern when
overdriven. This to some extent is similar to film's non-linear response
when under or over-exposed. Of course this varies by the type of film used.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame, but I think it's all...

Richard's fault!

Visit the Sounds of the cul-de-sac at www.richardsfault.com