Digital BW, The Print

In a message dated 8/20/2004 9:14:41 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com writes:

> So in spite of the wonders of digital, which I use for some 
> things, and the big prints that various users are happy with,  film has 
> dramatically more 
> resolution.
> 
> Of course others will argue and I know that, so let's not fill up the group 
> with endless digi 
> vs film.  They both have their uses.
> 
> And for "big prints", it depends on how far you view them from.  How does it 
> look from 
> "where they'll see it", as opposed to with a loupe?
> 
> Scott


I love to pick on blanket statements. Based on the same lens, same image 
circle, same imager size, even a Bayer sensor beats film anytime. Kodak has a 36 
megapixel sensor that is slightly smaller than 645 format. It can beat scanned 
color 4x5 film.

Film has more resolution than digitl ONLY if you use a larger format than 
digital, but we knew that from the film days. The resolution kings out there are 
the Clyde Butchers of the world who use 8x20" cameras with B&W film. But it 
takes 160 square inches of "imager" to do it (without batteries if you wish).

Assuming you have a quality device and capture technique, you only need about 
1,000 pixels of DIGITAL capture to equal an inch of film, since you 
interpolate ORIGINAL data. Film is always second generation data, inherently.

Black and white film is sharper than color film on any given format at any 
given ISO rating. That being said, capturing with color film allows you to post 
process filter the scene. Although not the same as putting say, an orange 
filter over T-max, you can create a greater variety of products from a color 
capture.

I have shot every format from Minox Spy Camera to 20x24. I am currently on my 
25th digital camera in 8 years, own 17 printers, including Big Epsons and 
have made big prints. I still have 10 digicams because they all suck at one 
application or another. I used to have 50 lenses and Nikon Hasselblad and Sinar 
when I shot film. No single camera can do it all.

I can say with a high degree of certainty after all that that on a "square 
millimeter of capture" basis, digital IS sharper than film.

The biggest problem I see with digial imaging is: overexposure in capture and 
Oversharpening the output. Don't let bad practitioners with ugly output cause 
you to badly judge good technology.

Claude





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