There are two kinds of fools

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



For a "snapper" digital is "better in every way."

Digital still has a hard time with many of the minute details which make film and hand printing beautiful.  I've shot a d1x and d100 since they came out, along with the Hassleblad H1 system and leaf backs on Sinars.  All of these formats are good for for certain things.  Still, I don't think digital is a replacement for film or hand printing.  Processes which are natural and left, at least some what, to the possibility of slight error are always going to have appeal. I can not tell you how many times, I've made a mistake processing or printing with traditional methods only to think---wow look at that, and then say to myself, "can I do it again." I seem to find, this occurs much less frequently with digital work, and when it does---it doesn't have near the same punch.
  
There are two kinds of fools: One says, "This is old therefore it is good." The other one says, "This is new therefore it is better." - William R. Inge

My humble regards, 

Blake Pearson
Birmingham, AL






On Jun 10, 2005, at 9:13 AM, Qkano wrote:



<<
I gave up my LF dream until I'm done with my PhD, which is only a
couple of weeks away now!!!
I think I'll start with 5x7 and then keep moving ;)




Why bother?

The future is digital.

It's better in every way than film.
The quality achievable with a high end digital SLR is already as good as LF (so they say) and you don't have to buy any film ... 

Q

PS: 37 is the number raw files per GB of storage medium :o)











-- 

Whatever you Wanadoo:

This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm




[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux