JesseS Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
I agree 100% with Keith ... apples and oranges when it comes to screen and light table viewing. I feel that the two, digital and slide images, can ONLY be compared in print (or other end result). I assume that most of us here are printing, in some form, as our end result. I don't trust what I see on screen. I have a process ... I follow it and only judge what I see in print. For example, I have to "oversharpen" my images (or sharpen to a degree that they appear too sharp on screen) in order to make them appear realistic in print. I just don't think it's fair to judge digital images in any other way than comparing the end results (whether it's in print or other display forms).
I also have to disagree with some comments here, or rather provide an opposing perspective (for those who may be making decisions based on our feedback). I am producing prints right now (with my D60 and Epson 2000P, up to 11x17) that surpass the prints I was making in the past with Velvia drum scans — in terms of *apparent* sharpness, color accuracy/saturation and dynamic range (or depth). Yes, this discussion is so subjective. That's why I'm chiming in. Under a loupe, the Velvia prints win of course — due to the "digital quality" of D60 images (artifacts, etc.) But ONLY I will ever look at a Velvia print under a loupe. My customers won't. They will hang the image on a wall, use the image in an advertisement, etc. — and never give thought to 99% of the stuff we photographers think about, worry about and discuss in these forums. I'm not trying to minimize such efforts, but I've discovered the need to just need to step back and view my art as the rest of the world would — and make decisions based on the END result. I sometimes tend to get hung up on the details along the way (including much of what ONLY we photographers consider to be negative aspects of the digital process).
I have shown many people (who don't know what's going on behind the scenes) samples of both types of prints, and they all unanimously prefer the prints made from the digital D60. It kind of shocked me, because of my learned experience and previous frame of mind regarding the digital medium. They like the buttery-smooth, noise-free characteristic of my D60 images. They love the color. They say the images really "pop" and look so real — probably due mostly to the digital "edge" that Peter mentioned. My opinion is that my D60 images are MORE "3-D looking" than my old slide-based images — again, based on viewing my end result: fine-art prints.
I may "know" things that may lead me to "believe" that slide-based images are philosophically better than digital images, but does it really matter in the end? The technology is "there" with the D60. I can prove it with my 11x17 prints. If you want to print bigger, you should be using medium format anyway (in my opinion). I may doing something wrong, or right, but the dynamic range in my D60 images is BETTER than what I was getting out of contrasty Velvia slides. Your opinion depends on your film choice I guess. The ONLY reason I carry my EOS 3 in my camera bag still is to capture the really wide field of view that my "1.6x" D60 can't.
What is your end? What are you doing with your photography? Have you displayed your end result — both film and digital — before a group of people and listened to their opinions? *I* care only about what people think about my prints. My customers prefer the digital-based prints. *They* think the quality is better. I happen to agree, despite what I think I know and what others say about the process. That ends any discussion about the differences, pros/cons, and so forth between digital and film — in my book.
I capture landscape images. NOBODY else is shooting what I'm shooting. Photography is capturing a unique moment in time. If my competition is standing RIGHT next to me in the wilderness, photographing the exact same subject matter with slide film — then I might be inclined to worry about the fact that he can print a 16x20 image while I can only print 11x16. All other variables are equal in my opinion. When I get a full-frame sensor, and can use the 16mm end of my 16-35mm, then film-based photography is a distant memory.
Jesse
|