When I saw some digital (D100) and 35mm film (some Fuji slides I think, couldn't get more details) prints exposed in a gallery in several cases I liked the digital result better (they were cleaner, which imho would have worked well for some portraits). In other prints however the film grain wasn't intrusive, but the reflection from the uncoated glass was. I don't know if that's the best both mediums could do (I doubt it), but I was amazed at the quality one can get from both 6MP DSLR and 35mm slides - and can't wait to see a real, large format print :)
Alex Sarbu On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 08:51:28 -0800 (PST), Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Normally when I hang a show, I group photos based upon > aesthetics and theme, not necessarily anything to do with how > they were produced. So in some cases, my matted and framed > all-digital inkjet photos get hung right next to scanned > film-inkjet and wet-lab produced prints. > > People often ask how a particular photograph was made. The most > telling comment, from what seemed a fairly knowledgeable > individual, that came back was, "Hmm. From film, you say? That's > mighty good for a film image." > > ;-) > > Godfrey > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. > http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 > >
