Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
> Hi from Loving Texas |
*** Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks *** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Hi Steaphany, and welcome to FADU, looking forward to your works of conversion.
__________________
Cheers Vincent - Not afraid of the dark |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Hi and welcome to FADU
neil |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Hi Steaphany and welcome to FADU. Pleased to hear that you too feel film is the only way to go with LF at least.
__________________
"To the attentive eye, each moment of the year has its own beauty, and in the same field, it beholds, every hour, a picture which was never seen before, and which will never be seen again" Ralph Waldo Emerson. Timespresent Arenaphotographers |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
What sold me on going back to film was realizing how I could properly dispose of spent darkroom chemicals here on my ranch while saving the costs of hiring a hazmat chemical waste company to send a truck the 120 miles from Dallas just to pick up a few liters every once in a while. (I live out in rural Texas and there is nothing local) I've also recently done the math, calculating what size digital imager would be needed to match various film's resolution. Fujifilm's Astia 100 and Provia 100 both yield 140 line pairs / mm when recording an image at 1000:1 contrast. Put into terms of digital pixel counts, a standard 35mm frame would require an imager with 67.7 megapixels. The closest digital camera that I could find with a 35mm frame was the Nikon D3X at 24.4 megapixels. (I normally don't follow the megapixel wars, so there could be something larger out there) I've also looked into the digital scanning backs designed for the large format world. They do an incredible job just as long nothing moves through a region of the frame as the scan passes by. On Betterlight's own web site, where they are showing off what their scanning backs can do, this photo of Tenaya Lake; Yosemite National Park, California has just such a flaw. Open the link, zoom in all the way, go to the bottom of the frame and move right of center until you find the car passing some tall trees. Considering the costs, I do not feel images with errors like this justify it, especially when compared to film. I like and will be keeping my Sigma SD14, which I have been able to make quality 32" x 22" prints from, but I recently added a Sigma SA-9 to my kit, found the like new SA-9 with a pair of lenses on ebay at $150, and I will be moving into 4x5 large format because I do not like how limiting fixed lens cameras are. The fact that the 4x5 frame size would equate to 893.8 megapixels is just a bonus. Cost, something so dear to digital proponents, is not an issue either. Twelve 36 exposure rolls of 35mm Provia 100 plus the E-6 chemistry to process them costs $118.95US, or just 27.5¢ / 67.7 megapixel equivalent image. Hey, I'd have to shoot over 29,000 images to break even with the current cost of a Nikon D3X camera body, ignoring the loss of image resolution that would come with it. Since C-41 costs less, just 17.6¢ / image, it would take over 45,000 D3X images to reach the break even mark. I know digital photographers claim there is no wait to see the image. Hmmm, like that tiny screen on any digital camera shows enough detail ? We all know that such displays are professionally color calibrated on regular intervals. (just being sarcastic) The closest I come to chimping is an occasional quick glance at my SD14 to check the histogram, not going "ooh ooh" over the photo. When put to numbers, the digital arguments fall apart. Last edited by Steaphany; 2nd November 2009 at 03:42 PM. Reason: typo |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Well put Steaphany and again like you I too was frustrated by a fixed lens system which is the main reason why I got into view camera use.
__________________
"To the attentive eye, each moment of the year has its own beauty, and in the same field, it beholds, every hour, a picture which was never seen before, and which will never be seen again" Ralph Waldo Emerson. Timespresent Arenaphotographers |
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|