Hi Frank - I know that debating these matters with yourself leads to quicker agreement, but you are the only Frank in this discussion... ;-) And I must say you are quite the kidder, pretending not to know the difference between a statement of your recent personal experience, which is plausible and valuable, and blatantly false blanket statement such as this one: > In all practical ways digital has exceeded the capability of film for > some time. Glad we got some precision and "resolution" (yikes sorry) into the discussion... Eric Goldstein - - On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Frank Dernie wrote: > On the contrary, Frank, I believe both statements to be true. In all my > recent experience digital -is- in all practical ways superior to film. OTOH > it is a matter of personal choice so if somebody wants to use film that is > fine by me :-) > > > On 13 Jan, 2009, at 16:46, Eric Goldstein (not another Frank) wrote: > >> Frank, glad to read this much more reasonable and modest statement >> about digital's capabilities, and your own personal abilities and >> tastes, in contrast to this earlier statement: >> >>> In all practical ways digital has exceeded the capability of film for >>> some time. Certainly if there is an >>> effect which one wishes to achieve, using a vintage LF lens for example, >>> film may have to be the >>> choice but that does not make film better, just an appropriate choice in >>> some circumstances. >> >> >> Eric Goldstein --- 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 //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list