Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Digital Shortcomings



At 13:52 22/06/01 -0700, you wrote:


>stuart@shaws2000.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
>
>
>>>Just wondering, if "glamour" a code word porn these days...
>>
>>No :-))
>
>My reason for asking this actually had a purpose, beyond the humorous. 
>Getting quality color processing for certain type of images can prove 
>problematic in certain parts of the world.  I'd think (why would I know? 
>;-)) that this is an area where digital proves quite, shall we say, 
>"convenient", as the "instant" films used to be.

Art- I live in Scotland which is hardly the most liberated of countries 
-believe me -and it is relatively easy to get film processed but I 
appreciate what you say about digital avoiding any potential problems in 
this area.


>>>I have seen output from digital cameras used for quick model portfolio 
>>>work, and it looks very reasonable.  If you are making work for the web, 
>>>I doubt that whatever defects digital manifests would be very 
>>>meaningful.  At the end of the day, the web is a digital media, and so 
>>>most of the translation removes the majority of "film" qualities anyway. 
>>>(I am speaking here about higher end digital cameras 2-4 megapixel with 
>>>good lens and exposure option).
>>>Heck, not to over due the old saw, but... we're speaking of jpegs at 
>>>72-120 dpi, aren't we?
>
>If these images will never require reproduction in another form, such as 
>printed hard (now I'm speaking glamour!, not as above, so no snickering) 
>copy, then the digital will do well.  However, if you might be eventually 
>selling images in other formats, or have clients who require other 
>formats, unless you are using fairly expensive 'state of the art' 
>cameras/backs, you might find you cannot get the quality your clients 
>might require or expect.

I would be supplying websites so I probably wouldnt need to produce prints 
etc . I would know before the shoot if the output was intended for ,say 
magazines, so would shoot transparencies ,if that was the case
Stuart

>Art
>
>
>




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.