[rollei_list] Re: [OT] film vs digital
- From: "Neil Gould" <neil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 08:12:15 -0500
> From: ERoustom <eroustom@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 20:52:13 -0400
>
> Interesting. What I saw when last looked at the most current issue of
> the NG Magazine was poor quality (mass-distribution style) presswork
> and cheap thin paper. I'd be surprised if the switch from slide to
> digital has anything to do with it. Taking a color photo and breaking
> it into process colors, is digital RGB to digital CMYK regardless of
> origin, and something is lost there, and then again when the ink hits
> the paper. Commercial printing, if anything, is what digital
> photography serves best.
>
I agree with your perspective. I shoot digital when the images are going
to print because the printed media becomes the "archival" storage media
for the image. Otherwise, image maintenance is a PITA and before long
ovecomes the time savings that shooting digital provides.
Neil
---
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:
