Another digital versus analog showdown
8x10 film is solid overkill.
"We’ve covered a huge amount of this territory in our previous comparison article, but in summary, 8×10 trounces the Phase One camera for absolute detail but unless you’re printing over three meters wide then it’s not going to be visible."
https://petapixel.com/2020/03/19/8x1...ixels-compete/
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
Just more filler BS, a half-baked article with no real purpose. 8X10 film in the ring with one hand tied behind its back, as usual. Apples vs oranges. Pick your flavor.
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Just more filler BS, a half-baked article with no real purpose. 8X10 film in the ring with one hand tied behind its back, as usual. Apples vs oranges. Pick your flavor.
Drew film won..
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bob carnie
Drew film won..
I don't think that matters to Drew.
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
"Test" proves much of ZERO...
Another single factor focused "test" that ignores the far greater whole of print making.
BTW, this has ZERO to do with "Winning"...
Bernice
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jp
8x10 film is solid overkill.
"We’ve covered a huge amount of this territory in our previous comparison article, but in summary, 8×10 trounces the Phase One camera for absolute detail but unless you’re printing over three meters wide then it’s not going to be visible."
https://petapixel.com/2020/03/19/8x1...ixels-compete/
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Drew Wiley
Just more filler BS, a half-baked article with no real purpose. 8X10 film in the ring with one hand tied behind its back, as usual. Apples vs oranges. Pick your flavor.
I like having choices of flavor, so long as it's not kool-aid (or flavor-aid)
The purpose of most petapixel articles is clicks. But digital didn't stand up to 8x10 in these limited tests.
In terms of printmaking, nobody wet prints from Velvia. If it actually gets printed, it will be the same options as the digital gear.
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jp
8x10 film is solid overkill.
"We’ve covered a huge amount of this territory in our previous comparison article, but in summary, 8×10 trounces the Phase One camera for absolute detail but unless you’re printing over three meters wide then it’s not going to be visible."
https://petapixel.com/2020/03/19/8x1...ixels-compete/
Image quality is very expensive in MPix terms, probably the IQ4 yield is well under 100MPix effective, simply because the available lenses won't do more in that small sensor surface.
What is LOL is that a 1970's film Mamiya RB67 will deliver the same image quality than the IQ4. Of course a Pro may prefer the IQ4, absolutely no doubt.
Anyway the RB67 has an advantage, by loading Portra 160 of Velvia 50 we radically modify the spectral footprint, while IQ4 is tied to the spectral sensitivity of its fixed sensor.
Anyway an enthusiast that do not professionally shot hundreds of images dayly would be proud of the RB67 results, matching the IQ4, and if using a sharp film like TMX then the RB67 easily surpasses new MF digital.
One day I was shooting with a friend sporting an IQ3, that day I loaded CMS 20 in the RB: this is being a bad guy :)
One thing is also true, with digital we may easily stitch several shots if subject is static, with film this is not that convenient.
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DonJ
I don't think that matters to Drew.
+1!!
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
These comparisons/arguments remind me of the Mac vs. PC flame wars of a decade or more ago. Those have died down, thankfully.
Re: Another digital versus analog showdown
Those are pretty nice images but I can shoot a whole lot of film for $52,000 and I don't have to front that amount to start.