It's worth something. Not a single one of the photographers you mentioned, if they were in the prime of their career would NOT be shooting digital capture, especially Ansel Adams. He told us himself decades ago before he died that he wished it was available to him then. It wasn't. --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, David Aschkenas <Daschkenas@...> wrote: > > In my eyes, the bottom line is film looks different than digital. PERIOD > Think of it this way..can you imagine a photo by Robert Frank, Josef > Koudelka, Cartier Bresson, William Klein....without a grainy grittiness??? > Can you imagine a photo by Weston, Strand, Stieglitz, Adams or any other > large format shooters..WITH grain and grittiness?? > Different looks come with different materials ..film / cameras / digital / > gelatin silver /platinum /inkjet .....on and on. > Just pick the combination that gives you either the look / feel you like, or > the look you can live with. > It's not about pixels, it's about pictures. > Just another photographers 2 cents. About all any of this is worth! > David Aschkenas > -- > David Aschkenas > 915 N. Euclid Ave. > Pittsburgh, PA 15206 > 412-363-3458 > > www.daschkenasphoto.com >
Message
Re: [Digital BW] Scanning 35mm vs digital camera
2006-03-24 by john dean
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.