LF digital article in PHOTO Techniques

Mustang

A
Mustang

  • 0
  • 0
  • 67
32nd Avenue

A
32nd Avenue

  • 0
  • 0
  • 69
Saab

A
Saab

  • 0
  • 0
  • 74
Chevy Van

A
Chevy Van

  • 1
  • 0
  • 72

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
182,067
Messages
2,519,709
Members
95,488
Latest member
Crit-ter85
Recent bookmarks
0

David Brown

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
3,986
Location
Earth
Shooter
Multi Format
After the reaction to Pop Photo's article on the Nikon F6, I am surprised that I have not seen a thread on the article in the current PHOTO Techniques mag about digital scanning backs for LF.

"A traditional, large-format photographer believes that digital has surpassed film quality. At least at the high-end."

Not to start an "issue" here, just curious that it hasn't been mentioned. Is it too "off" to even comment on? :wink:

Cheers, y'all.

David
 

WarEaglemtn

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2004
Messages
461
Shooter
Multi Format
How do you make a contact print from the pixels?
Will the back make better pictures from stand development or do you have to get a JOBO processor for it?
What happens when you want a 6 hour star trail photograph when it is 20 below zero?
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
22,360
Location
West Midland
Shooter
Multi Format
David Brown said:
"A traditional, large-format photographer believes that digital has surpassed film quality. At least at the high-end."

David
Sure, and actually having seen my advertising and commercial photographer friends at work, there may be some truth in the statement under controlled conditions and at a very high cost.

However Shaun has set up a Grey Area for discussing the interface between Digital and Analog which can be found here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

And Wareaglemtn it would be possible to make a contact print from Pixels I was going to bid for a film writer on ebay on Thursday, £22,000 when new about 10 years ago, it sold for just over £600 and took 5"x4" Darkslides or a Roll film holder

However this Forum is for photographers still practising the dark arts, tinkering with the alchemy of films, papers and developers.
 

Ole

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2002
Messages
9,250
Location
Bergen, Norway
Shooter
Large Format
The big problem - apart from cost - is finding a 5km long power cord. That, and carrying the PC and extra hardware into the mountains in unpredictable weather.

I think I'll stick to film a while longer.
 

Jorge

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2002
Messages
4,515
Shooter
Large Format
Well David, I am not sure why it has not been mentioned. In my case perhaps because I have not seen the magazine here in Mexico. OTOH it gets old talking about this. I sincerely doubt that a digital back can have better quality than film in LF. To spend $22000 on a LF back that will give me almost as good or "as good" quality than film, seems to me a foolish expense. So, I dont worry about it anymore, I keep doing what I know what to do, and if I ever see an ink jet/lightjet/film recorder print that equals the quality of my pt/pd prints. Then I might reconsider digital as something to ad.
 

jmailand

Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
151
Location
Belmont Mich
Shooter
Multi Format
It states in the article that the minimum exposure time for thing is 32 seconds as it scans across the exposure plane. Thus it only see's one area (scan line) of the photo at a time. I don't see how this improves on film, pixels aren't everything. Digital has its uses, but the outright lies that have been used to market the technology have turned me off. I think the main reason for the big digital push is that you have to buy (consume) a new digital camera every couple of years, thus making camera company's rich. So far I've mostly used my digital camera to take pictures for EBAY auctions so I can upgrade my film cameras.
 

Aggie

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2003
Messages
4,914
Location
So. Utah
Shooter
Multi Format
That was the back at the LF conference in Monterey. Yeah I want to tell everything I focus on it is time to stand absolutely still so I can scan it for a long period of time. They were quoting up to 15 minutes starting at 30 seconds for each scan. Only good for studio work in my opinon. At the price of the back, I can buy a very nice lens, some lights and an ULF camera to do the same thing, and not worry that it will be obsolete next week.

BTW most the time that booth was not visited.
 

Jim Chinn

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
2,512
Location
Omaha, Nebra
Shooter
Multi Format
I love how they run these articles about LF digital backs, or making 30x40 inkjet prints, or taking your negs down to have them Scanned on a Tango scanner and never realy get into the costs of such endeavors.

I remember an article in View Camera about someone producing stunning B&W inkjet prints from scanned 4x5 negatives and then printed via a laser type enlarger. The scans were $250 each, I think a print cost (one single print!) $100 to produce. And this was all to get an image as good as a normal traditional print.

First, can that process get any more complicated compared to a contact print?

Second, when will these authors quit glossing over the costs of hardware, software, and upgrading every couple of years?

For the professional who will save $$$ in the long run with digital pixelography I understand completely. But I get tired of every article regarding digital pixelography never discussing the disadvantages compared to real photography.
 

jimgalli

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
4,091
Location
Tonopah Neva
Shooter
ULarge Format
.........................yawn................................................
 

Joe Lipka

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Messages
908
Location
Cary, North
Shooter
4x5 Format
Now you can work with this extra long scanning time that Aggie mentioned. About fifteen years ago I saw some work where the subject (a model) moved throughout the scan creating some totally abstract images. That was novel.

But I think jimgalli summed up the entire thread succinctly.
 

donbga

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
3,053
Shooter
Large Format Pan
David Brown said:
After the reaction to Pop Photo's article on the Nikon F6, I am surprised that I have not seen a thread on the article in the current PHOTO Techniques mag about digital scanning backs for LF.

"A traditional, large-format photographer believes that digital has surpassed film quality. At least at the high-end."

Not to start an "issue" here, just curious that it hasn't been mentioned. Is it too "off" to even comment on? :wink:

Cheers, y'all.

David
If I could afford it I would buy one in a heart beat.

Don Bryant
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom