Digital vs Film
Do any of us still shoot film? You say "No I don't see anyone shooting film, but I've heard there are a few". However some of us would say "Yes about half the people I know still shoot film".
Certainly it would be rare unless of course you are among the crowd who shoots for a specific venue. Digital is so quick and easy. True, but is it as good? Well that depends. Digital certainly seldom fails to produce a good image in a relatively easy manner. But does it produce as good as image as film?
When printing up to say an 11x14" print digital looks fantastic and can go way beyond that if a lot lines up well. But when you try to print larger and are not getting truly nice prints, sharp from center to edge, then you might see why film can produce some very very good large prints for those of us who demand the very best Image Quality.
I'll keep this brief as someone else has done an excellent job of describing the details of the differences between film and digital. And you might find some very interesting details
It is a rather exhaustive article so for those of you who prefer getting to point, I'll sum up in just a short read right here. Feel free to Comment if you have any questions or helpful advice.
For reasons many of us won't spend reading all or even most of Ken's article, suffice to say that the ability of even the best sensors coupled with massive MP data, to collect sufficient light, followed by the need (when enlarged to a big print size) for image data to be created, is not going to be as good as film's ability to allow for enlargements. The reason is that the informations which is needed for enlargements already exists from film, but has to be created for digital.
A Can-O-Worms? Sure. A controversial subject? You bet. But When you read Ken's article you will see convincing evidence. When will digital catch up? Perhaps sooner than some of us think. But the sensors must be created with much more expensive sensor photons and hugely increased Megapixel dimensions. How many of us will be able to take advantage of this? Very few. It's damned expensive to do either of these and the two combined will prove in the short term, to be available only for the highest echelon of Pro photographers.
The positive side? Well if we are creating our own art for our own homes, then we will be able to pardon some indiscretions in perfection. Either that or we leave the big prints to the professionals.
Certainly it would be rare unless of course you are among the crowd who shoots for a specific venue. Digital is so quick and easy. True, but is it as good? Well that depends. Digital certainly seldom fails to produce a good image in a relatively easy manner. But does it produce as good as image as film?
When printing up to say an 11x14" print digital looks fantastic and can go way beyond that if a lot lines up well. But when you try to print larger and are not getting truly nice prints, sharp from center to edge, then you might see why film can produce some very very good large prints for those of us who demand the very best Image Quality.
I'll keep this brief as someone else has done an excellent job of describing the details of the differences between film and digital. And you might find some very interesting details
It is a rather exhaustive article so for those of you who prefer getting to point, I'll sum up in just a short read right here. Feel free to Comment if you have any questions or helpful advice.
For reasons many of us won't spend reading all or even most of Ken's article, suffice to say that the ability of even the best sensors coupled with massive MP data, to collect sufficient light, followed by the need (when enlarged to a big print size) for image data to be created, is not going to be as good as film's ability to allow for enlargements. The reason is that the informations which is needed for enlargements already exists from film, but has to be created for digital.
A Can-O-Worms? Sure. A controversial subject? You bet. But When you read Ken's article you will see convincing evidence. When will digital catch up? Perhaps sooner than some of us think. But the sensors must be created with much more expensive sensor photons and hugely increased Megapixel dimensions. How many of us will be able to take advantage of this? Very few. It's damned expensive to do either of these and the two combined will prove in the short term, to be available only for the highest echelon of Pro photographers.
The positive side? Well if we are creating our own art for our own homes, then we will be able to pardon some indiscretions in perfection. Either that or we leave the big prints to the professionals.
Comments