Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/12/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] TidBits: Digital Better than Film
From: shino at panix.com (Rei Shinozuka)
Date: Tue Dec 13 10:05:59 2005
References: <4cfa589b0512122340y422edeefu886df66dd0c960a4@mail.gmail.com> <CFB1BC9E-8F5E-4A43-84F7-F169AD7E3F5A@interlink.es>

the article was almost completely geared to post-processing the
image with photoshop, correcting perspective, selectively changing
contrast and color saturation, and so on.  nothing you couldn't do
with scanned film.

the writer did state that maximial depth of field was his goal:

  When everything is sharp within a photograph, photographic 
  compositions open up. People don't just look at my pictures, 
  they look inside them, combing them for detail - and they find 
  it, because I have controlled the details' contrast.

to liberally summarize, the writer's aesthetic is a painterly one;
all objects of interest should be bright and focused, all others 
unfocused, darkened, reduced in contrast and color saturation.

his results look to me to be half-way between oil paintings and
photographs:

http://www.tidbits.com/resources/809/GrossAbattoirFlowers.jpg

Hence, the argument is not really not digital versus film 
at all, but one of aesthetics and techniques which utilize a 
digital workflow.

-rei

On Dec13 09:53, Luis Miguel Casta?eda wrote:
> On 13/12/2005, at 8:40, Adam Bridge wrote:
> 
> >Here's a link to an essay demonstrating why digital is better than  
> >film.
> 
> using that way you can demonstrate anything, just populate a sheet  
> with techy gibberish and redefine better to suit your goals.
> 
> My conclusion:
> a) You're nobody without a digital camera, they are the holy grail  
> and the philosopher's stone combined.
> b) Don't matter how crap you do it even representing it in your brain  
> tissue, you can fix it later.
> c) [ and most important ] buy photoshop
> d) buy photoshop now, just in case that c) conclussion wasn't clear  
> enough.
> 
> :-)
> 
> Now seriously: this article has interesting points, but... aren't we  
> bored to death of those endless arguments in both ways? :)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

-- 
Rei Shinozuka shino@panix.com
Ridgewood, New Jersey


Replies: Reply from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] TidBits: Digital Better than Film)
In reply to: Message from abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] TidBits: Digital Better than Film)
Message from lmc at interlink.es (Luis Miguel Castañeda) ([Leica] TidBits: Digital Better than Film)