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 » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Erwin Puts On The Fundamental Differences Between Film and Digital Imaging



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 19th 06, 01:36 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Erwin Puts On The Fundamental Differences Between Film and Digital Imaging

Gordon Moat wrote:


I think people using colour film who are not scanning are missing out,
at least for larger than 8" by 12" prints.


Even for 4 x 6 prints, without scanning you have little if any control
of the contrast or colors in the print and this matter just as much for
small prints as large. True larger prints will have more to be gained
but there is still a lot to be gain for smaller prints.

Scott

  #22  
Old March 19th 06, 07:52 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Erwin Puts On The Fundamental Differences Between Film and Digital Imaging

In much the same way that DVDs have just joined VHS, or film simply
joined glass plates. How about the way cds have joined lps and 45s, or the
way lps and 45s joined 78s or the way 78s joined cylinders?
We all know that radio has continued to have the same high quality
comedy, drama and variety programs that dominated the airwaves before
television, and of course so many of us still take those fast packet boats
to Europe and back.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"sobolik" wrote in message
...

"This is again proof of the classical adage that a new medium does not
kill the previous one, just joins it."

I like reading rational approaches to the subject compared to emotional
ones.
Photograph is like any other thing as long as there is a market there
will be supplies. There is a huge market restructuring under way right
now. That restructuring is not really reflective of rabid photographers
needs and wants, just the masses. The muscle car era can be said to be
done and dead by looking at the present market for the masses. The
rabid Muscle car enthusiast has no trouble however.
I do not care if the masses embrace the digital such and such. I will
still be able to pursue what ever I want including the Super 8 that is
mentioned. I will still be able to take a 35mm photo of the guy as he
takes fashion photos with his cell phone.

"This is again proof of the classical adage that a new medium does not
kill the previous one, just joins it."


--
sobolik



 




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
Digital Stock /Footage & Clips CDs, updated 24/Jan/2006 [email protected] Digital Photography 8 February 3rd 06 04:00 AM
"Nature's Best" contest and film vs digital Bill Hilton Photographing Nature 15 December 8th 05 12:03 AM
8Mp Digital The Theoretical 35mm Quality Equivelant Matt Digital Photography 1144 December 17th 04 10:48 PM
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? Michael Weinstein, M.D. In The Darkroom 13 January 24th 04 10:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:42 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.