Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/02/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It's quite true, Tina, that the digital file lacks grain - and if one prefers the lack of grain, that's a plus. It's also a pretty uncontrovertibly fact that an 11 meg digital file does not have as much information in it as a 20 meg file of a scanned negative - and therefore it is physically impossible for a 16x20 print of that digital file to have as much detail as a 16x20 print of a scanned negative - and it sure as hell isn't possible for a grayscale file of that 11 meg digital file compare in any way other than "sharpness" to a print of the same dimension as that produced from a 4000 dpi scan of a b&w neg. I, too, print using the piezo system, and agree with you that the piezo prints are just as good, but different, than silver prints. That does NOT mean that a 16x20 print from a 3.5 meg grayscale file from an 11 meg color digital file is "just as good but different from" a 16x20 print from a 20meg scan of a negative. ;-) And I, while I am quite sure that I am 'losing friends' by refusing to let go of this point - really don't understand why you are apparently unwilling - in light of this discussion - to acknowledge that you lecture on the merits of the Diglot on behalf of Leica. B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tina Manley Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 3:30 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: RE: [Leica] Digital - Rumor Mongering apologies to Mark R. At 12:02 PM 2/22/2003 -0500, you wrote: > And if you get >better gray scale files from a gray scale conversion of an image that >started as an 11 meg color digital file than you do with what I assume >is a 4000 dpi - or 20 meg 8 bit scan of a T-Max neg, you are doing >something very very wrong with your T-Max. It's kind of like the difference between a darkroom print and a quad-black inkjet print. They are different animals. I happen to prefer the look that I get with the quad-black inks, but that is a matter of preference. One is not better or worse than the other. The difference in the scanned film and the digital file is the lack of grain in the digital file. Some like that look, some don't. Unless I'm doing photographs of peeling paint or bench tests of lenses, I hope that the content of the photograph provokes more comments than the method used to achieve it. I'll go with the best means available to get the photograph I want. Right now, that is the M7 and TMax film in some situations and the Digilux and a Secure Digital card in others. One is not better or worse than the other ;-) >And, while I understood that you paid for your Digilux, am I not >correct in understanding that you were included in the Cape Cod - Park >Square/Leica underwritten - photo workshop to give a workshop >specifically on the Digilux? That, to me, is doing promotional work for >Leica. God knows there's nothing wrong with it - I'd be happy to do >such work! - but it might have some impact on your view of the quality >of how those 11 meg color tiffs, which reduce to 3-4 meg grayscale >tiffs, produce 16x20s that are superior to 20 meg grayscale scans of >film. ;-) Ask anybody who was at the seminar and looked closely at the 16x20 print that I passed around of the doctor and the young woman with the baby. Tina Tina Manley, ASMP http://www.tinamanley.com photos available from: http://www.pdiphotos.com http://www.mira.com http://www.agpix.com http://www.newscom.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html