Berry Ives <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Here's an idea. I think all of us could agree to one thing, and that is: >what finally matters is how good the print looks. (Okay, some folks only >care about web published images, so you guys can get lost--no offense.) >There needs to be an art show where what we are judging is the actual >prints. Some will use digital cameras, some film scanners. We get a chance >to really judge the final result, the result beyond all theory, the result >that we can see on paper with our own eyes!
It's an interesting idea. I suspect that in a lot of cases, the details of the print (paper, printer, ink) will be more significant than the difference between a high end digital camera image and a 35mm film image. Especially if the final size of the prints are limited to say A4. Prints to larger than A4 will require scanning from 35mm at more than 2700ppi, but I suppose that's a question of categories as Yves has already suggested. Personally I wish I could figure out a way to make money from my photos so I could afford some of the gear which some other list members regularly use. Although I'd settle for a few better lenses, a better film scanner and a better printer! ;) But I'll probably have to content myself with observing people talking about their Mamiyas and Zeiss lenses and dream... Rob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
