Digital BW, The Print

I wish that I hadn't added the part about the D1X because now this thread will go into a discussion of GF, raw files, etc. My intent was to discuss what we are doing as a new medium with a new look.
Sorry.
Stan
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Shire,Stanley 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 10:46 AM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Reference Print/Reality Check


  Scanner is Nikon LS4500.
  BTW, I borrowed a d1X and did not notice a marked increase in res.

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: SKID Photography 
    To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
    Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 1:29 PM
    Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Reference Print/Reality Check




    "Shire,Stanley" wrote:

    > <snip>  I shot many CF cards full of images with the 990.
    > I made a dozen or so 11x14 prints with my 1270 (HWM, Enhanced Gen inks) and my wife (who has looked at way
    > too many of my images over the last few decades) said, "They don't look like the old stuff" "What old stuff"
    > "The old stuff that you used to do in the darkroom"
    > Wow! Reality check. Cut to the chase. The difference (for her) was both resolution and the look of the
    > print.
    > After looking verrry critically at the images, she was right. The fine detail in aspens and other landscape
    > elements at great distances is not there. It's subtle, almost sensed rather than immediately evident.
    > Revelation #2
    > I went to Gettysburg for a few days. I took Mamiya 7, NPS, 3 lenses and a tripod.
    > Astounding.
    > The scans of the negatives were lovely. Detail, range, beautifully smooth gradations, no noise in the 90
    > second dusk exposures.
    > The prints were wonderful.
    > My wife said "Better, but they don't look like the old stuff." Huh?

    Just curious....What scanning equipment did you use for the negatives?

    Also:  I am not surprised that the digi camera images did not have the subtleties in the details, especially
    in landscape images, and especially at those sized prints...I think as capture mechanisms improve, this will
    change, but right now (with the cameras you mentioned) there are real limitations.

    Harvey Ferdschneider
    partner, SKID Photography, NYC


    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
                ADVERTISEMENT
               
         
         

    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




    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  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

  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 "flames."
  - 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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]