Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... I m not arguing with Austin; I am using replies to his posts as platforms for further clarification of the concepts under discussion. I figure that
Messages
Browse messages
Page 1797 of 2186 · 109257 messages matched
Re: [Digital BW] The Old Posterization Problem
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Editor P.O.V. Image Service
... YEAH, there was a stain out treatment I used to buy at Looking Glass photo in Berkeley California.. It worked wonders on my shirts and pants in
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Austin, i have a serious question for you, and I feel you can best explain it. What, precisely did the universe look like 5 minutes before the big bang? Jer
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... Are those cameras still around? How many are there, and who is using them (and for what purposes)?
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... A 16x20-inch print cannot even come close to exhausting the resolution of Technical Pan. In order to exhaust the resolution of Tech Pan at 300 ppi, you
Re: [Digital BW] Re: human retina
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... Not so. You are focusing on the ground glass. And since it is only a few inches away, if you are farsighted, you won t be able to focus on it without
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Anthony, Anthony, you cannot come out ahead in an argument with austin. It simply cannot be done. The first person to win one gets an 8x10 photo of my
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... Yes, there are. ... Your logic is flawed. The availability or unavailability of corroboration for an assertion is independent of its objective validity;
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
AAAAaargh! I give up. Digital prints are crud. Long live film. It s SO much better than digital. Satisfied Austin? :+). ... No point in making a little one.
RE: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Shire,Stanley
Yeah, but they re so much fun to read. Hours of entertainment (with some actual info thrown in) Stan Shire Associate Professor/Department Chair Photographic
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
warning! Warning! do not begin a new argument with Austin. You cannot possibly hope to win. :+). Jerry
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
And I ve heard the Pearl industry only hires Japanese women to sort their pearls, as they can see better than any other eyes, or at least see what the pearl
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Hmmm. I actually like those. Jerry
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
But they are so clumsy to carry when backpacking... and what s a sheet of film cost, about 200 dollars per shot? Jer
RE: [Digital BW] Converting color images to grayscale
2002-09-07 by Shire,Stanley
I ve recently been using the Convert to BW Pro plug from www.theimagingfactory.com It give me a bit more control than any
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by sm7bxd
Jerry, Quote you: Hope your scanner can take advantage End Qoute! That s the problem. I wish I had more money! The Minolta Multi Pro $3000 scanner can not
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
I loved the Leica M5,6, etc, but I have thick glasses and could never see the image and rangefinder very well. Especially with anything wider than a 35mm. I ve
Re: [Digital BW] RE: Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Moreno, Austin, Ah, I now know what you mean. The older 5 bladed lenses that had pentagon shaped highlights were indeed horrible. Now I understand exactly what
Re: [Digital BW] RE: Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Mike just got a Mamiya 7II camera and loves it! I would have one if I could afford it and about 3 lenses. Great camera ! (You had made the comment that the
Re: [Digital BW] Nikon Back Up Body
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
I had an F4 for a few years. Outstanding camera in all respects. Jerry
Re: [Digital BW] Epson quad B&W inksets for 2200,7600,9600 coming soon
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Paul, one company is working now to develop a continuous inking system for the 2200. It should be ready within 6 months. You ll be able to use any ink you
Re: [Digital BW] Digital vs. Film... Part II
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Andy, taking a 4 megapixel image to 30x40 really is pushing it, but I have seen some 20 x30 s with no pixelization. Did the fellow who made the prints upsample
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Austin, I m speaking of tripoded landscape photographs, as I believe I did mention... Jerry
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Bo, I would think Tech Pan and a Hassy neg would be good enough for ANY body. Hope your scanner can take advantage of that combination! Except Austin, of
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
... I agree with everything that Alan said, except the quality of a print from the D-30. I have easily made 11x16 prints from the D-30 that are VERY sharp in
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Well, I do have an apple computer, and I suppose you have a PC :) Austin, in the future, just assume what I say is applied to the entire image. I m including
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Moreno Polloni
... The digital scanning backs are ok (especially the 12k 4x5 backs), but if you want sharp, it s pretty hard to beat a 3ft x 6ft polaroid.
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Anthony, I guarantee you that back could equal technical pan in a 16x20 inch print. Museums are using scanning backs to copy their paintings, and the detail
Re: Bokeh Mojo
2002-09-07 by marktuckerdotcom
... wrote: First, I love bokeh, but this good/bad axis for ... Well said, Frank. My nomination for Bokeh Mojo Lens of the Year is the Hasselblad
Re: [Digital BW] Bokeh Defined
2002-09-07 by Jerry Olson
Martin, I hope someone who lists Bokeh as one of their Gods will put up a really good example of the same image, one taken with a lens with bad bokeh, and
Re: human retina
2002-09-07 by marktuckerdotcom
... wrote: The normal length human retina has only ... us ... Two questions: 1. Fovea, where light is in focus ; this must be where the
Re: [Digital BW] Re: Bokeh Defined
2002-09-07 by JimD
... But, but...It can t possibly be better bokeh than what some folks maintain they get from their Leicas, can it? And gosh, what about the resolution, not to
human retina
2002-09-07 by MARK MAIO
... My two cents regarding vision. The normal length human retina has only one small area, called the fovea, where light is in focus in all of us who do not
Re: [Digital BW] RE: Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Editor P.O.V. Image Service
... Like those of us who do sports or serious portraiture work... For us, BOKEH, is a big factor... Imagine shooting a football game with a 400/2.8 or 600/4...
Re: [Digital BW] Plug in Filters...effects
2002-09-07 by Editor P.O.V. Image Service
... Actually, there are filter sets that do exactly what you want... Ad the parent plug-in is well worth the few bucks... Keith [Non-text portions of this
RE: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Austin Franklin
Anthony, ... Well, if it s just such a fact, then, surely, there are many sources you can provide. Without proper corroboration to your claim, your claim has
Re: [Digital BW] Re: UltraChrome 100 Hr Fade test
2002-09-07 by Paul Roark
I noticed that the Epson Australia web site that has the 75+ year rating also has a footnote that applies to all the papers: Test Conditions ... 3. The
RE: [Digital BW] Epson quad B&W inksets for 2200,7600,9600 coming soon
2002-09-07 by Paul Roark
I think the 2200 series might be an ideal platform for a pigmented small gamut inkset. It ll be interesting to see if Epson goes that route. I ll ask MIS if
Re: [Digital BW] Epson quad B&W inksets for 2200,7600,9600 coming soon
2002-09-07 by Paul Roark
... I hope to have some data on the open question of long term color shifts due to differential fading in a few weeks. So far, no color inkset has been able
Re: [Digital BW] Plug in Filters...effects
2002-09-07 by culturalvisions
If you want scratches on the negative, take an unexposed, processed piece of film and scratch it the way you want. Scan it and add it to your image as a layer
Re: Bokeh Defined
2002-09-07 by culturalvisions
Just like there are F-64 nazis, there are bokeh nazis. The F-64 fanatics think that stopping down is the answer for every picture. This often disregards the
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by sm7bxd
OK Jerry, Thanks for your advice, I ll keep to Techn Pan and Technodol, until I can afford that Sinar back for my Hassy. Or any other digital camera at about
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... I addressed only resolution, and since your impression of sharpness and detail seems to be a function of more than just resolution, that impression does
Re: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... On a 6x6 negative, Tech Pan provides up to about 576 megapixels, or 26 times the resolution of the digital back described.
Re: [Digital BW] Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Anthony Atkielski
... As I ve explained, it s not a claim, it s a fact. I don t need a source. Anyone can research this for himself; he doesn t have to believe me. Eventually
Re: [Digital BW] RE: Shooting digital vs. film
2002-09-07 by Moreno Polloni
... If you shoot mostly landscapes with infinity focus and small apertures, then yes, the bokeh of a lens has little bearing on your image, and yes, it d
Re: [Digital BW] Plug in Filters...effects
2002-09-07 by DC
... You could experiment with using noise or film grain filters, then running a motion blur on them. That can get you a scratched looked, but I don t know if
Re: [Digital BW] Epson quad B&W inksets for 2200,7600,9600 coming soon
2002-09-07 by marktuckerdotcom
... wrote: Then us black and white ... unproven Imageprint ... the 2200. Have you custom-profiled your 2200? I find the 9600 to be *very*
RE: [Digital BW] Digital sharpness vs film- Canon D60
2002-09-07 by A. Huntley
Hi Ross, Jerry has already responsed with some good advice, but I ll add my 2 cents...FWIW... The Canon 28-135 IS lens is a great walk-around lens - not as