Digital BW, The Print

Harvey,

I find your sarcastic tone offensive.

I see sky "*BETWEEN*" tree branches.  Squirrels?  Hardly.  Rocks?  Hardly.  
Birds?  Rarely.

Perhaps you are so defensive because you mis-interpreted what you read, or 
put your own spin on it.  It would be helpful to cite the source when 
parroting someone else's findings; otherwise, an evaluatuion is impossible.

Helene 


> I find your question perplexing.  In any place, there is visual information
> between trees and branches, like details of rocks behind the trees, 
> squirrels,
> birds, whatever.
> 
> What exactly do you *think* could be between tree branches?  Certainly 
> there has
> to be *something*!
> 
> There was a similar thread on one of the scanner lists last summer, and it 
> also
> included the resolving power of films well as something to do with lenses.
> During that discussion, someone posted a bunch of details from scans and 
> digital
> captures.  It *clearly* illustrated what I am talking about (a picture 
> being
> worth 1000 words and all), and am frustrated that I cannot explain it 
> further.
> 
> 
> Harvey Ferdschneider
> partner, SKID Photography, NYC
> 
> 
> grdglass@... wrote:
> 
> >  Harvey,
> >
> > What exactly is the information between tree branches?
> >
> > Helene
> >
> > << Actually the digital cameras do very well with the tree branches 
> (because
> > of the
> > straight line algorithms), but it's the information *BETWEEN* the 
> branches.
> > It's that information that the digital cameras cannot resolve or properly
> > interpret, but can be found in film. >>
> 



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