![]() ![]() Digital uprezzing was done using either a stepped technique in Photoshop (bicubic in 10% increments), or more recently, Genuine Fractals. All the film was scanned using Nikon scanners (Super Coolscan 80), except for the 4x5 transparencies, which are scanned on an Epson V700 (definitely a disadvantage). Quote from: Dan Wells Compared to Velvia 100, here are my experiences with a range of digital cameras I have known. The 50D has larger pixel density than the Canon 1DsIII and would have about 38.4 MPixels on full frame. In a sense it would be interesting to use a higher resolution sensor like Canon 50D, but that sensor has a AA-filter reducing sharpness. Regarding the camera it is true that it's not a very high resolution sensor but it being an APS-H (1.3 factor) sensor at about 10 MPixels it's essentially in the same league as the Canon 1DsIII with regard to pixel size. The film based image does not have this characteristics. If you look at the test images it is very clear that the digital capture is significantly aliased, indicating that the lens is resolving higher than the sensor. Putts, but he is the author of the Leica Lens Compendium and it's my impression that he is an optics expert. You may also ask what's wrong with the Canon printer? It' shows all the aliasing we need, so it does clearly not lack in resolution. Would you reed his other articles you would know that he is really careful about testing. ![]() Putts is a much better scientist than me. So technically the newer digital cameras are indeed way over powered, but better or worse in image quality is just not a subject that is easy to put in the same box. Well surprise, that ugly grain is not only character building, but also fetches a lot of money in galleries. It has it's qualities, it has it's beauty, and good luck trying to make digital look the same with all that awful grain etc. What is all that horrible grain blah blocked up shadows in your print blah, > either you get it or you don't. Good why not just take a good B&W neg and print it correctly. Well then you say wait this is film comparison to digital. Advantage in this case will always be digital as you haven't handicapped the capture. So for those of you scanning on CCD scanners the quality of your capture are not at their best. Now, I know Joseph has contacts with Heidelberg in Kiel and I know them as well, but I am going to be cruel and say the Tango is only a good scanner. I was more interested in film to digital comparisons before and during I had my drum scanner. Well, I guess I wont go there, just telling you why KR is an idiot.Īnyhow, just spend 5 minutes reading his website and it will become quite clear.Ī lot of interesting posts in this thread. Ken got bamboozled by the Apple marketing machine like many others, the facts are rather simple, Apples generally look better (not always) and usually they work and are more expensive. This article is about the dumbest I've ever read, it's filled with more idiotic statements than I could ever care to count. ![]() The man has no clue how to write a sentence, he is delusional and has visions of grandeur. We love ours, especially because we got it, brand new, for almost $30,000 below sticker price! Why Did we Get This? Again a contradiction The 2006 Cayenne Turbo S was only available for part of 2006. I can't aford this stuff I haven't bought a new car since I got a new Ford back in 1986.)" Yet he wants you to donate to his website "because He supports his family doing this" He says he can't afford his wife's car but then he writes "Sure, I make good money doing this, but I also pay more taxes than I ever have in my life." I can get from point A to point B faster in a Jeep Cherokee SRT 8, so does the equipment matter? Why buy a $100,000.00+ SUV when you can buy a $40K SUV that will trash it. He writes "(note: this is my wife's car. He even does car "reviews" And I have to wonder if equipment doesn't matter with photography why does it matter with anything? Cars? Ken is a oxymoron, everything he writes contradicts something else. ![]() All computers are junk except for Apples, everything and anything made by Apple is the best. Equipment doesn't matter is great, he can take a better photograph with a Kodak 110 than you can with a Nikon D3X. He usually makes absolutely no sense, just read some of his garbage. Because Ken Rockwell is arguably one of the dumbest people posting drivel on the internet. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |