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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
That Worn-Out, Old "Film vs. Digital" Debate
"Philip Homburg" For fine grained film, dye cloud sizes can be in the order of micrometers. Are you saying that you are printing to film at 25000 ppi? If not, there is a good chance that the difference will be visible under a microscope. The last time I checked, there were no camera lenses that resolve 25000 ppi. We don't image dye clouds, but at up to a true 4096 pixels per inch or 160 lines per millimeter written by a point light source, I've never been able to tell the difference under the best 10x loupe between an original and an LVT and neither have any of my customers. Actually, we can't tell at less than half that resolution. We've enlarged these films up to murals as well. To be honest, I've never used a microscope, and there might be some artifacting there to give it away, but if you had no original to compare it to, what would you look for to tell you that it wasn't original camera film if original view camera lenses aren't any sharper than what this process can yield? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
That Worn-Out, Old "Film vs. Digital" Debate
In article TBbbh.15934$Uz.1518@trnddc05,
babelfish wrote: The last time I checked, there were no camera lenses that resolve 25000 ppi. We don't image dye clouds, but at up to a true 4096 pixels per inch or 160 lines per millimeter written by a point light source, I've never been able to tell the difference under the best 10x loupe between an original and an LVT and neither have any of my customers. Actually, we can't tell at less than half that resolution. We've enlarged these films up to murals as well. To be honest, I've never used a microscope, and there might be some artifacting there to give it away, but if you had no original to compare it to, what would you look for to tell you that it wasn't original camera film if original view camera lenses aren't any sharper than what this process can yield? There is a good chance that if you scan it at a very high resolution, there will be evidence of that 4096 ppi in the frequency domain (but there are probably a number of other statistical correlation techniques that allow you to find patterns that result from the digital imaging system). The issue is not whether the original is sharper, but whether you can hide artifacts from your digital system in the noise. This assumes of course that somebody really sets out to prove that it is a forgery. -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
That Worn-Out, Old "Film vs. Digital" Debate
The debate is already over and the transition is moving even faster than
most people expected. For the amateur market the casual snapshooter has been the economic driving force forever. Most of the 4x6 prints which have been made really never needed to see the light of day! Almost nobody is the developed world uses film for casual photography today. In much of the professional world the situation is the same. Newspapers ditched their darkrooms and were glad to do so. The film which is used professionally almost all is on it's way to a digital scanner for final printing and reproduction. Slides have been replaced by digital projectors, and this is a good thing because the very act of projecting slides degraded their dyes. The debate is already over. Film will continue as a small niche product for special applications or special artistic needs just as vacuum tubes are still around and a few people make tintypes. I drug my heals for a very long time and even though I was smart a few years ago when I picked up some amazing lenses for my vintage Minolta 35mm equipment for next to nothing. I still enjoy using the stuff for a few special purposes, but the majority of my needs are best met by digital equipment and a digital workflow. Compared to the wet darkroom my "digital darkroom" consisting of Photoshop CS and an EPSON 2200 is a great pleasure to use. The processing industry is adapting to the digital imaging world by printing digital files onto silver paper. This results in a lot less waste as the non-keeper photos are not being printed very often any more. Once you are working in a digital darkroom it is much, much easier to start with a digital file instead of film. John |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
That Worn-Out, Old "Film vs. Digital" Debate
John Horner wrote:
The debate is already over and the transition is moving even faster than most people expected. ...huge, much needed, SNIP... (Yea, it is 'worn out,' except that you just can't stop flapping on about it...) Do you have anything meaningful to contribute? Once you are working in a digital darkroom it is much, much easier to start with a digital file instead of film. No, not really. That's what a "scanner" is for! Believe it or not, that horrid old film you love to bag on really does continute to WORK. It WORKS very well, thank you! Now, go meausrebate your megapixels.... |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
That Worn-Out, Old "Film vs. Digital" Debate
In article ,
Greg Campbell wrote: Now, go meausrebate your megapixels.... I think he is lacking pixels in some key areas "If you know what I mean" -- George W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to insert the "modified time" attribute in "date taken" attrib in batch mode | ashjas | Digital Photography | 4 | November 8th 06 09:00 PM |
"Nature's Best" contest and film vs digital | Bill Hilton | Photographing Nature | 15 | December 7th 05 11:03 PM |
"Nature's Best" contest and film vs digital | Bill Hilton | Digital Photography | 1 | November 28th 05 07:44 PM |