Digital BW, The Print

One thing I forgot to mention on my original post is the big reason that I'm
still using film...portability.  I shoot prime lenses.  My Voigtlander Bessa
R2 Rangefinder (think Leica M6 here) and four prime lenses fit in a small
bag that I bought for my since traded Nikon N990 digital camera.  The  nikon
had a zoom lens and I had an extra wide angle adapter.  The equivalent
lenses and my D1x and the battery charger...and the laptop...take up the
back seat of the car.  Try to take that on a day hike!...or for that matter
on a shoot chasing a model around an abandoned building. In addition, two
$150 batteries last a day until they need to be charged.  My Bessa will
shoot on two cheap batteries for a year...and in fact will shoot without any
battery if you don't need metering.  Energy consumption, for me, is a huge
limiting factor for digital in terms of practical use.  I can't tell you how
many times I grabbed the D1x and I had lost battery power, and missed the
shot.

Another aspect.

Robert

On 9/5/02 11:16 AM, "shileshcjani" <shilesh.jani@...> wrote:

> For now, and perhaps long-term, we will just have to accept
> differences between digital capture and scanned film. In my
> experience as a first time digital camera user (D100), the results up
> to 12 x 18 print size are at least acceptable from my D-SLR. The
> look, however, is different from film captured images. To me, the
> differences are akin (but not identical) to the differences between
> 35 mm and LF systems. Each is capable of compelling photographs, yet
> produce aesthetically different prints. Add to that the
> practicalities, such as portability, ability to be spontaneous (hand-
> held), degree of enlargement, depth of focus, on, and on.  So, I do
> not expect my D100 to produce results identical to my film based 35
> mm system. I am hoping it is capable of producing compelling prints;
> and if it has this potential, whether or not I get compelling prints,
> is all up to me - the guy behind the viewfinder.
> 
> Best wishes.
> 
> Shilesh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "charles_bandes"
> <byronbulb@y...> wrote:
>> Yeah, it's all a question of your standards and expectations.
>> 
>> I must say though that the relative lack of noise and grain from the
>> digital cameras goes a long way to increasing the final detail level
>> compared to film. Even 4000 dpi scans from hasselblad negs done at
> my
>> portrait lab have _tons_ more noise/grain than I get with the S2.
> Mind
>> you, they have a lot more resolution, but a lot of that resolution
> is
>> being used to resolve grain patterns, which isn't helpful (imho) in
> a
>> final print. 
>> 
>> I'm of the opinion that one can make great 20x24" prints in-darkroom
>> from 35mm negs - other people tell me that 35mm is not useful past
>> 11x14" - we probably have different standards. The same is probably
>> true here. I am delighted with the 12x18" prints I have been making
>> from the S2. I probably wouldn't be happy with them at 30x40" - it's
>> possible that you would think that my prints are soft or lacking in
>> detail, but my clients and viewers have been happy, and that's what
>> matters to me :)
>> 
>> I won't be badmouthing film anytime soon, I really really really
> miss
>> doing darkroom work, but the digital stuff just makes more sense for
>> the moment.
>> 
>>> I agree with very sharp, any image can be made to be very sharp,
> film or
>>> digital, but I question "highly" detailed at 13x19.  "Quite"
> detailed,
>>> yes...and I'm sure they look pretty good, but I think you
> oversell the
>>> ability of these digital cameras to capture "real" image detail.
>>> 
>>> The D60 has a 3152 x 2068 sensor, and it's an interpolated Bayer
> pattern
>>> sensor.  Anyway, 2068 along a 13" side gives you only ~160 PPI to
> the
>>> printer, which is somewhat marginally sufficient.  Whether
> you "rez"
>> up or
>>> not, rezzing up can't create detail that was not captured by the
> imaging
>>> device in the first place.
>>> 
>>> One or two more generations of digicams (probably 16M pixels) and
>> I'll buy
>>> "highly" for a 35mm size digicam on a 13 x 19 ;-)
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Austin
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
>