[rollei_list] Re: Digital Advice
- From: "Austin Franklin" <austin.franklin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 12:24:18 -0400
Hi Michael,
> Now that the output from these cameras far exceed the quality that
> I could produce (for my normal wedding/photojournalism work) with 35mm
> film...
Shooting both film and digital, for quite a few years, I still don't see
higher digital quality from any sub $2k digital camera than 35mm film. But,
that's using my criteria...some people think that sharpness somehow is
higher image quality...but in reality, it is typically not. I think a lot
of the digital "quality" people like, like sharpness, are a false metric
with respect to actual image fidelity. Comics are very sharp, but have
little detail.
So, anyway, though I fully appreciate and agree that *some* people believe
their digital output has higher "quality" than they got with film, I believe
a lot of it is misperception of actual image fidelity. But, hey, since in
today's society perception is everything (reality takes a back seat), then
if they think an image with lower image fidelity is higher "quality", who am
I to argue.
The bottom line is, it really depends on what the criteria for "quality" is.
That, for some reason, seems to almost never be stated.
Regards,
Austin
---
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
Other related posts:
