There was an article not long ago in Design Graphics, an Australian Graphics design magazine. They compared a 4x5 digital back on a Sinar and 4x5 velvia. The digital quality ran circles around the Velvia. So IF you have the best equipment, you CAN better film. But most of us will never have a hundred grand for a digital back. Jerry Truman Prevatt wrote: > > I normally shoot 4x5 Tmax 400 and scan 2400 dpi. There is no way that > the current digital cameras can compare. First I have much more control > on your contract control and dynamic range through controlling the > negative development. This is in my opinion where the digitals have to > get much better before they can claim to be "as good as film." The only > way to do that is with at least 16 bits. Third is for an 8x10 - even a > 16-20 I am throwing away a boatload of information when when I print. > > Yes it's a bit more work but IMO it is worth every second of it. > > Truman > > Seth wrote: > > >=Just curious as to what your thinking is in that if we scan > >=the negatives we should just do digital images in the first place? > >= > >Once you scan, you ARE digital. > > > >It's just a LOT of extra work. Processing, scanning plus all the Photoshop > >work. But, add dust removal, etc. to the equation. > > > >Don't get me wrong. I have two D1s. And, an F100 and Hasselblad 503CW for > >film. Still have a B&W darkroom. > > > >Right after getting the D1's I was very skeptical for quite a while. Then I > >wound up on a job in Italy and Crete. I shot EVERYTHING important on both > >digital and Provia (35mm). I am here to tell you that have slides that are > >NO better than the digital when printed on EAM. > > > >I WILL admit if I were making murals or 30x40's I would use the film. But I > >don't do that. Even in that case I would go to a 4x5 inter-neg. > > > >/r, > > > >Seth > > > > > > > > > >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 "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 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 "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 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Message
Re: [Digital BW] best scanner for b&w
2003-02-24 by Jerry Olson
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.