Len, I have no doubts that you can make 16x20 prints from 3MP camera that would kick medium format's ass <VBG>
Mishka P.S. No, I don't have a digicam. However I have used a few, so I do have some first hand experience. -----Original Message----- From: "Paris, Leonard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:05:41 -0500 Subject: RE: Digital vs.FILM: will digital cameras lose the war? > > I am sometimes bothered by folks that have not really tried digital making > major judgements about it based on second or third hand knowledge, hence my > post. I've been using digital cameras for quite a while now. I find that, > like film and film cameras, you have to take some time to learn the > equipment and the medium before you get good results. There are plenty of > bad results from film cameras that I could use to make sweeping statements > concerning film in general but you won't hear me making them because I know > that the skill of the photographer counts more than the equipment she/he > uses. > > To make a statement like, "For many pro photographers, quality is less of an > issue than convenience" does a serious disservice to professional > photographers and the editors, art directors, and others that select and > publish their work. I don't know any professional photographers that are > not concerned with quality. Just because some news photos were shot under > appalling conditions and the editors decided to publish what they got does > not mean quality was not an objective. > > Len > --- > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 10:00 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Digital vs.FILM: will digital cameras lose the war? > > > For many pro photographers, quality is less of an issue than > convenience. News and Sports snappers need the shots fast and details > like this don't matter. Studio Photogs can control the lighting and > avoid the situation. Where the problem is more prevalent is for > landscapes and architectural photography I would think. Interiors of > churches and the like can be a real problem even with film, where > natural light coming through windows 'whites out' and/or shadows block > up. Many digi cameras can be set to partially avoid this by shooting > with massively low contrast and then correcting later. I think this > often results in more noise and/or loss of detail in shadow areas though > as everything is recorded as 'a bit grey'. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paris, Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 29 August 2002 15:56 > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: Digital vs.FILM: will digital cameras lose the war? > > > > > > The digital photographers that I correspond with, on the > > PHOTODIGITAL mailing list aren't having these problems. Most > > were pro film shooters for many years but either have > > converted to digital completely or are in the process of doing so. > > > > Len > > --- > >
