[rollei_list] Re: OT film advice, film vs. digital

90% of my work is Fujichrome Velvia, which I process and I print on Cibachrome paper exclusively. The only other printing I do is B&W. But I'm a much better Ciba printer. My standard size is 20x24 but I do print smaller sizes upon request. I photograph mainly with my SL66 and Linhof Technikardan. My Hasselblad sits idle. I use my Leica M6 for documentary and happy snaps.


I have never owned a digital camera other than a Sony T7 (tiny little purse/pocket camera) until last week. I needed something that had the possibility of giving large hi-res files and take interchangeable lenses, and be able to use my Leica R lenses. I ended up with a Canon 5D with 24-105 f/4 lens (full frame sensor) for a song. I don't have an inkjet photo printer and I don't intend on printing any inkjets. The camera has another purpose, but, should I decide to print something, I'll send the file to Calypso Imaging and have a LightJet print made. www.calypsoinc.com LightJet prints come close to Ciba prints since they are made on 'real' photo paper - Fuji Crystal Archive paper. Some LightJets out there actually print on Cibachrome. Mostly in Europe I believe. I'm in Silly Cone Valley, CA.

:-)

Jim


At 11:30 PM 7/17/2007 -0400, Douglas Nygren wrote:
There is a wonderful photographer near me whose specialty is photographing rare and elusive birds in their nests at night. He also does wonderful color photography of marshes and the like. He used to use slide film and then make Cibachromes. When he switched to digital. He still uses slide film, but scans the slides and then works on them in Photoshop before printing them digitally. He is a master printer. His Cibachromes were magnificient and before that his dye transfers were stunning. His digital work is equally well printed, but I prefer the Cibas. They have a glow that is missing when they are done digitally. They are missing something. I'd be hard pressed to say what, but I see it. Having said that, I can't say I'm anti-digital. I use a digital camera. I should add my friend uses both MF and LF (4x5).

Doug


On Jul 17, 2007, at 9:46 PM, ERoustom wrote:

I don't think you need the flame suit Eric. This discussion is interesting, even if it leave Rollei Tech talk out.

I'm impressed with what's been happening in digital imaging, but I'm far more enamored of film cameras, film, and chemicals. I doubt anyone honest and committed to the photograph would rule either one out, off hand. But I must relay this little story: I was at an open studio event in Amesbury, MA a little over a year ago, where I entered a photography studio. The photographer was telling me he dismantled his b&w darkroom (though he still had it all, and was thinking about putting back together), and was showing some of his very good and colorful digital work, and impressing me with the output he was getting from some Epson printer. I was really amazed at the quality, so I was taking my time inspecting every image from about 10 inches away. I came to one that knocked my sox off, and I said to him "Wow, this thing is amazing - so this is what digital can do these days!" "No," he said a little embarrassed, "that one is silver gelatin."

Elias


On Jul 17, 2007, at 6:11 PM, Eric Goldstein wrote:

Exactly. To be blunt (flame suit on), these discussions always get
side-tracked by engineers who attempt to measure and quantify and
define, whereas the serious image makers can see the differences in
subtleties and nuances and textures straight away...

This reminds me of the debate between video tape and film in
television production; a debate which is about to reprise itself in
the motion picture world as soon as a digital standard is adopted. The
serious image makers always saw the superiority of film, and to this
day after over 60 years of video capture and 40 years of video tape,
film is still the medium of choice for prime-time dramatic series and
commercials (typically the most expensive productions on TV) no matter
how many "film-like" processes the engineers come up with for tape to
emulate it...


Eric Goldstein

--

On 7/17/07, Gene Johnson <genej2ster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
for me it's not the resolution.  Don't care so much.  it's dynamic
range, it's texture, it's ....personality.  Digital images have a
persistent sameness to them.  Especially with medium and large format
film, it's the ability to use selective focus more effectively.  The
sensors in digital cams are very small, and even portraits are many
sensor lengths away. For nudes and still lifes, these are two very
different media.
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list


---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list


---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: