Ted - no arguements at all on color, I only do black and white.
Bruce - that is all correct, of course, but isn't that why we do zone stuff to match the negative to the output, even if it is a lower dmax scanner rather than a lower dmax paper? You can certainly pull a lot more range out of a negative with a drum scanner, but isn't the real question how much of that you can put back on paper?
Since all I can get on the paper is 256 shades, if that, my task is to get enough out of my negative to fill the range of the paper, not to get everything out that is possible. My problem, which is the same as those who print in conventional means, is to do my best to get my negative to match the range of my output media. The consumer scanner will capture more dynamic range than I can get on paper, which is all the really matters, if the negative is right.
Sharpness, OTOH, is a bigger issue and one where the drum will clearly do better and where the only thing I can do with the negative to comensate is to take pictures of things with no fine detail.:-) So there will be an increasing gap in sharpness between my scan and a drum scan as the print gets larger, if the viewer stands close, and if the image depends on fine detail to work.
My bigger concern, and one that I think gets lost in this crusade for techical perfection, is that very few memorable images depend on techinical perfection. We can tinker with technology, and buy better technology, but we cannot buy inspiration and timing. Those we only get by shooting a lot of pictures so we are ready when it happens. I do not think this is an issue for Ted or for Bruce, but I read a lot of posts from folks on the list who are new to photography or who have not found their way yet, and I worry that they will let these discussions of the ultimate image distract them from shooting pictures and concentrating on what is in those pictures.
Bookmarks