• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

The irony of film beating digital at its own game.....

yeh, I guess I misinterpreted the OP by assuming that a technique described as "INFINITELY better" would be readily demonstrable on a photography site by a photographer with strong convictions
 

Arri did a study on this. About how 4k motion picture scans were superior to 2k ones, even if the final output was 2k. Or something along those lines. I didn't read the whole thing, just skimmed it, but here it is.
 
I have found that when using a 21mp DSLR, it MURDERS 35mm film in details, sharpness, and resolving power.

However the 35mm film MURDERS this DSLR in dynamic range.

And for this reason, I prefer to shoot 35mm film over digital, because I value DR more then resolving details.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I tend to believe that words can be as useful in communicating comparitive distinctions of analog versus digital representations as visual comparisons. Indeed, many people do not agree that that "image" is the thing. I for one believe that the object/photograph itself is the only important thing and that anything seen in an image file is only a second hand copy of a referrent and construct of the phenomelogical world.

Sandy King
 

So true Sandy, and in other words, it's the composition that matters and is the prime directive....too much is made about the process, the medium, the journey, and not often enough about the reward: the print.
 
Tony, I scan all my 35mm film pictures. As to DR, yes I believe some is lost but not as much as when shooting with my DSLR...scanned film still has wider DR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register