A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

I started a 35mm B&W darkroom forum



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old December 17th 04, 12:27 AM
Gregory Blank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote:

In future I'll take more care in responding to cross-posted messages.
I still think the 'troll' had a valid point for the *average*
photographer. We can't all afford large format cameras.


Depends; The average digi cam user maybe, at a prosumer semi pro level
a digi cam is going to cost more for the equipment over a twenty-forty
year life span in camera upgrades than the film camera would have cost.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
  #72  
Old December 17th 04, 12:27 AM
Gregory Blank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote:

In future I'll take more care in responding to cross-posted messages.
I still think the 'troll' had a valid point for the *average*
photographer. We can't all afford large format cameras.


Depends; The average digi cam user maybe, at a prosumer semi pro level
a digi cam is going to cost more for the equipment over a twenty-forty
year life span in camera upgrades than the film camera would have cost.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
  #73  
Old December 17th 04, 01:58 AM
Tom Phillips
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Dave wrote:

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:59:44 -0700, Tom Phillips
somehow managed to impart:

Try (1) reading the headers and (2) learn how to recognize a
troll. The OP is trolling and crossposting. Your observations
and knowledge of nsgs appears as limited as your knowledge of
enlarging and optics...

Clearly, you've never seen an Ansel Adams mural sized
enlargement.


[major snip]

OK, I'm sorry I overlooked the rec.photo.darkroom cross-posting.


Not your fault. troll's fault.

But
there's no need to get so defensive. And there's no need to get
sarcastic, either.

Looks like I touched a raw nerve there. Maybe you should watch your
caffeine intake.


I don't drink caffeine I happen think people should
know what they're talking about before making broad
generalized statements. I'm just not shy about bluntly
setting the record straight. People states all sorts of
fallacies on usenet such as "enlarging degrades images."
Theoretically, images on film can be enlarged indefinitely.
Only limitations are (1) granularity and (2) optics. Like
I said, I've seen even 35mm enlarged to quality 30x40. So
it depends. Fine grain and good optics can equal unbelievable
resolution digital can't match. I've used high end digital
and know other photographes who routinely use digital for
commercial work. It simply never matches the quality of
film.

Difference is digital images and detail _can't_ be enlarged
and pixels arrays suffer from Nyquist (sampling limitations),
meaning good optics are wasted on typical digital cameras.
The only way to "enlarge" a digital image is softeware
interpolation (upsampling) which does degrade the image
by adding image data the lens never saw.

In future I'll take more care in responding to cross-posted messages.
I still think the 'troll' had a valid point for the *average*
photographer. We can't all afford large format cameras.


trolls post specious fallacies to start arguments.
Lots of decent, used relatively inexpensive medium/LF
equipment out there. Cheaper than digital. Digital
requires a computer, printer, software, storage (CD
burner) and _constant_ upgrades. If you don't have those,
talking $2000-$3000 minimum start up easy. Plus the
minute you buy a digital camera, it's outdated, just as
computers typically are. Digital is more expensive than
film photography.

Once you have a camera, a couple of decent lenses and
a few other accessories you're set forever. No upgrades.

Dave.

2180 hi-resolution photos especially Edinburgh &
Scotland. Also 3D rendered art & altered images.
* No advertisements * http://www.henniker.org.uk

  #74  
Old December 17th 04, 01:58 AM
Tom Phillips
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Dave wrote:

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:59:44 -0700, Tom Phillips
somehow managed to impart:

Try (1) reading the headers and (2) learn how to recognize a
troll. The OP is trolling and crossposting. Your observations
and knowledge of nsgs appears as limited as your knowledge of
enlarging and optics...

Clearly, you've never seen an Ansel Adams mural sized
enlargement.


[major snip]

OK, I'm sorry I overlooked the rec.photo.darkroom cross-posting.


Not your fault. troll's fault.

But
there's no need to get so defensive. And there's no need to get
sarcastic, either.

Looks like I touched a raw nerve there. Maybe you should watch your
caffeine intake.


I don't drink caffeine I happen think people should
know what they're talking about before making broad
generalized statements. I'm just not shy about bluntly
setting the record straight. People states all sorts of
fallacies on usenet such as "enlarging degrades images."
Theoretically, images on film can be enlarged indefinitely.
Only limitations are (1) granularity and (2) optics. Like
I said, I've seen even 35mm enlarged to quality 30x40. So
it depends. Fine grain and good optics can equal unbelievable
resolution digital can't match. I've used high end digital
and know other photographes who routinely use digital for
commercial work. It simply never matches the quality of
film.

Difference is digital images and detail _can't_ be enlarged
and pixels arrays suffer from Nyquist (sampling limitations),
meaning good optics are wasted on typical digital cameras.
The only way to "enlarge" a digital image is softeware
interpolation (upsampling) which does degrade the image
by adding image data the lens never saw.

In future I'll take more care in responding to cross-posted messages.
I still think the 'troll' had a valid point for the *average*
photographer. We can't all afford large format cameras.


trolls post specious fallacies to start arguments.
Lots of decent, used relatively inexpensive medium/LF
equipment out there. Cheaper than digital. Digital
requires a computer, printer, software, storage (CD
burner) and _constant_ upgrades. If you don't have those,
talking $2000-$3000 minimum start up easy. Plus the
minute you buy a digital camera, it's outdated, just as
computers typically are. Digital is more expensive than
film photography.

Once you have a camera, a couple of decent lenses and
a few other accessories you're set forever. No upgrades.

Dave.

2180 hi-resolution photos especially Edinburgh &
Scotland. Also 3D rendered art & altered images.
* No advertisements * http://www.henniker.org.uk

  #75  
Old December 17th 04, 02:12 AM
Jon Pike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote in
:

We can't all afford large format cameras.


Anyone who can throw money at a 10+mp digicam can afford LF cameras.

--
http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet
  #76  
Old December 17th 04, 02:12 AM
Jon Pike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote in
:

We can't all afford large format cameras.


Anyone who can throw money at a 10+mp digicam can afford LF cameras.

--
http://www.neopets.com/refer.phtml?username=moosespet
  #77  
Old December 17th 04, 02:16 AM
Gregory Blank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Jon Pike wrote:

Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote in
:

We can't all afford large format cameras.


Anyone who can throw money at a 10+mp digicam can afford LF cameras.


Funny I was thinking that very thought on my way back to the computer.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
  #78  
Old December 17th 04, 02:16 AM
Gregory Blank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Jon Pike wrote:

Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote in
:

We can't all afford large format cameras.


Anyone who can throw money at a 10+mp digicam can afford LF cameras.


Funny I was thinking that very thought on my way back to the computer.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
  #79  
Old December 17th 04, 03:20 AM
Frank Pittel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In rec.photo.darkroom Jon Pike wrote:
: Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote in
: :

: We can't all afford large format cameras.

: Anyone who can throw money at a 10+mp digicam can afford LF cameras.

A person can buy a real nice LF camera and a nice selection of lenses
for the price of one of those 10+mp cameras.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

  #80  
Old December 17th 04, 03:20 AM
Frank Pittel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In rec.photo.darkroom Jon Pike wrote:
: Dave dave@hennikerDOTorgDOTuk wrote in
: :

: We can't all afford large format cameras.

: Anyone who can throw money at a 10+mp digicam can afford LF cameras.

A person can buy a real nice LF camera and a nice selection of lenses
for the price of one of those 10+mp cameras.
--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I started 35mm B&W darkroom forum [email protected] In The Darkroom 0 December 11th 04 01:41 AM
Getting married in the UK or Ireland - WedUK have just started a new Wedding Forum The Warrior 35mm Photo Equipment 4 November 26th 04 01:20 AM
35mm on grade 3 explained Michael Scarpitti In The Darkroom 240 September 26th 04 02:46 AM
advantage of high $ 35mm optics vs. MF now lost? Bob Monaghan Medium Format Photography Equipment 30 September 12th 04 04:46 AM
Develper for Delta-100 Frank Pittel In The Darkroom 8 March 1st 04 05:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.