Subj : re: Thats the picture... To : Marc Lewis From : Baden Kudrenecky Date : Mon May 30 2005 09:16 am Responding to Marc Lewis from 1905-04-25 concerning re: Thats the picture..., on Os2 Hi Marc: I think you guys may be a bit behind the times. I don't know of any serious film photographer who can technically compete with digital equipment. Resolution is only one component, for which lenses are now more or less the limiting factor. CCD's excel for many other photography facets, and I only have to state the proof are in the results, especially for 35 mm format. Check this out: http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html baden ML> Hello Baden. ML> ML> message to Holger Granholm regarding Re: Thats the ML> picture... > ML> ML> BK> I completely agree with you, but digital images are so much ML> BK> finer and better quality than print images, ML> ML> What!? Put a fine-grain or ultra-fine-grain film into a ML> 35mm camera and you'd need something on the order of >100 ML> megapixels to reproduce the silver-halide results. With a ML> larger format camera there would be no comparison. ML> ML> BK> that to avoid using digital cameras due to archiving concerns is ML> BK> not reasonable. The answer lies in a finding a durable digital ML> BK> media and format. ML> ML> Regrettably, there is no digital media that can compare ML> with archivally processed film. Hundreds of years vs. a ML> few decades digital. Even with colour film - Kodachromes ML> shot back in the 30's are still intact - in the later 40's - ML> many are "like-new". (Not so for other colour processes ML> other than Cibachrome print material - most of them ML> deteriorate rather rapidly.) hasta luego, baden baden@baden.nu http://baden.nu/ ___ þ KWQ/2 1.2i þ --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000) .