Just got to second Pål on this, as I have discussed the D1 with Bjørn Rørslett in
person.
I've also got the book Pål speaks about, and I have had the same thoughts about
Bjørn's images as Pål mention here.
Just for the record.... :-)
Jostein
======= At 2003-01-17, 13:08:00 you wrote: =======
>Mike wrote:
>
>> Second, I'll provisionally believe someone who's actually made firsthand
>> comparisons with THEIR own eyes, like Michael R. and Ryan.
>
>But Michael isn't doing that. He claim to be performing empirical test proving that
>digital is better than film in every respect (his own words) but this isn't true at
>all. He is not providing any such tests and the "empirical" data these persons claims
>are nowhere to be found. Michael R is really saying that he is getting better prints
>from digital than from film, and nobody is protesting about this, while he claims
>that digital is "better" than film, something thats a completely different issue.
>
>Then theres the question of hyping something the very same person is prone to.
>Another guy, Bjørn Rørslett, was one of the early proponents of the original Nikon
>D1. Not surprisingly he also claimed that it was better than 35mm film and
>approaching medium format. He also provided "empirical tests" and even put them up on
>a web page. Funnily enough, the Norwegian association of nature photographer released
>a book last year with the members best works. Bjørn Rørslett was the only
>photographer with digital images in this book shot with the D1. The images are easy
>to spot. They are significantly worse than anything else in the book in terms of
>image quality, even if they aren't reproduced large. They are less sharp, less
>saturated, less detailed than any other images in the book and it's easy to even see
>that they are digital. Hence, we've heard all this before and until someone actually
>compare film with digital, as oposed to comparing scanner quality with digital camera
>quali!
>ty judged from a copy from both, I continue being sceptical if not downright
>rejective to all these claims.
>
>Pål
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Best regards.
Jostein
http://oksne.net
2003-01-17
