Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (74) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: ToesOnTheNose Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 21939  
Subject: Re: So, what do you shoot with? Date: 1/8/2004 6:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Medium format:
I use a Mamiya RB67 as my real workhorse. The 6x7 format is ideal for making very high resolution digital images using my Minolta Dimage scanner. This approach beats any digital camera that I can afford, and may even beat the high-end professional digital cameras for resolution. I can photograph mountainsides a few miles away and still see less than meter scale details in the finished image. I frequently build photocollages of miles-long outcrops using this camera.
++++

Great point. Not many people are willing to listen to this these days. But, what you have described is exactly why I have not yet choosen to move to digital. In order for digital to technically match the quality of film, the camera would have to have 200 megapixels, at a minimum, comparing to 100 ASA film.

That's a large difference. Where are all those differences? Well, to the naked eye, they are normally not very noticable if you have a high-end camera that produces at least 6 megapixels and you are doing 8x10's prints. Or, photographer who really know there stuff can produce larger prints with very little noticability that it's been done digitally.

Where you can tell the difference, and here's the reason most people don't care, is if you blow up a print to gigantic proportions. On a normal 6x7 format camera using a 110mm normal lens, you can blow that sucker up to billboard size and you get very good clarity. If you blow it up larger than that (why would you, who knows?), and compare that to the highest resolution digital image, you will find that the digital will prodcue the crappiest looking print you have ever seen in your life. It will literally look like a blob of color; while the film will hold together and you can make out what you are looking at, although it will be very grainy.

Here's a great article about it: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm

I do think it is fair and detailed and says things that digital people just simply refuse to listen to, in my experience.

I know it is just nitpicking in many cases. For the average person, digital is a wonderful alternative. In many ways, it has helped the photographic industry.

Also, I have been down this road and will not argue about it. I think digital and film are wonderful mediums. But, digital has just as many pitfalls, it just seems that digital users "overlook" the pitfalls because it is technology.

Toes
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (74) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next

Announcements

Online Photos
Yahoo! Groups
(Registration Required)
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement