12MP files from the Fuji S2 have been resulting in really nice prints up to 12x18 for me. That said, the quality is different than film - there are some ways that I prefer the S2, and other ways that I prefer Velvia. Certainly it can't compete with medium format yet, but right now I'm pretty much discontinuing use of 35mm except for wide-angle work. And definitely, definitely, no question about it, you get more latitude from film. On the other hand, with digital, if your exposure isn't dead-on, you find out instantly, so it's easier to fix. --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "akivisuals" <akivisuals@y...> wrote: > Does anyone here have input as far as shooting digitally vs. > scanning transparencies or negatives? I have heard that you > can get more latitude with digital. Also, you don't have to worry > about the whole scanning process and paying for good drum > scans if you shoot digitally if the camera is capable enough. Do > most people in this group scan trannies or shoot digitally? What > level camera do you need to be able to print good 16x20's or > bigger? How big can you print with a 6 megapixel Canon 1D, > D60, D30, or Fuji S2? I'm curious to see what people are using > to create their images. Thanks! > > Andy
Message
Re: Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-05 by charles_bandes
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.