----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Erickson Subject: Re: The old digital/film debate
> I think the wedding photographer comments below say a lot about their > previous MF workflow. I've seen showcase Lightjet prints that originated > as 35mm chromes, medium format chromes, large format chromes, and > Nikon D1x direct digital captures. If they're done right, images sourced > from medium format and large format chromes will completely blow away > digital > sources in smooth tonality, detail, and lack of artifacts. > > That said, I bet that it's a lot easier for a wedding photo business > to put together a good digital workflow than an equally-good chemical > workflow. > > I'll look forward to picking up some good, cheap 67 or 645 gear when > I have the spare bucks.... Key words though are "wedding photographer". Fine detail is the enemy of the wedding photographer. I know when I was in the game, I didn't take a picture without a Softar on the lens, ever. If digital capture allows them to get better results (such as built in softening via lack of captured fine detail), more power to em. One issue that comes to mind for me is copyright. If the photographer cannot produce an original negative to prove ownership, can he enforce copyright on the image? William Robb > > --Mark > > -----Bruce Wrote----- > > I just got off the phone talking to my wife who is out to Utah > attending a couple of weddings. She told me that the one she went to > last night was shot by a husband/wife team. They have gone fully > digital and are selling off their film gear. They told her that they > have blown up to 30 X 40 and get better quality than MF. They asked > her if I had any interest in buying their 35mm gear. My hunch is that > they haven't really seen the quality of MF for comparison. Be that as > it may, "the dogs seem to be eating it." That is, their clients are > satisfied with what is coming off the digital equipment. > > Me, I'll stick with 6X7 for awhile. I am amazed out how detailed > things are - nothing like my coolpix 990 images. Texture and tonality > are amazing. The digital just looks clean and non-jaggy but no subtle > tones and detail is missing. If you never saw the detail, you don't > realize it. > > Anyway, it sounds like the revolution is going on in the wedding > arena, which will make for some inexpensive MF equipment being offered > up soon. > > > Bruce Dayton - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
