Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Another digital versus analog showdown

  1. #1
    jp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    5,297

    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/

  2. #2
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    14,147

    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.

  3. #3
    bob carnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario,
    Posts
    4,563

    Re: Another digital versus analog showdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Wiley View Post
    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..

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    73

    Re: Another digital versus analog showdown

    Quote Originally Posted by bob carnie View Post
    Drew film won..
    I don't think that matters to Drew.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,715

    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 View Post
    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/

  6. #6
    jp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    5,297

    Re: Another digital versus analog showdown

    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Wiley View Post
    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.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    4,499

    Re: Another digital versus analog showdown

    Quote Originally Posted by jp View Post
    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.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Madisonville, LA
    Posts
    2,106

    Re: Another digital versus analog showdown

    Quote Originally Posted by DonJ View Post
    I don't think that matters to Drew.
    +1!!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    now in Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    2,917

    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.

  10. #10
    C. D. Keth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UT
    Posts
    2,083

    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.
    -Chris

Similar Threads

  1. Rubber stamp for "digital versus analog" threads ?
    By Ken Lee in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 23-Aug-2014, 08:02
  2. analog and digital - again
    By peter ramm in forum On Photography
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 26-Jun-2011, 17:11
  3. analog to digital metering
    By Los in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2-Mar-2008, 08:58
  4. Digital vs Analog Holography
    By John_4185 in forum On Photography
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 9-Jan-2006, 10:33

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •