[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [APML] OT: digital vs film



Oh boy,
 
    Let's not start THIS again ... those of us who know better know that the boundaries between film and digital are starting to blur more and more with each passing day ... you may shoot film, but I bet you use some form of digital post processing ... where do you draw the line? You can use film to start with and use digital to process, or you can shoot digital and use dedicated film-type processing like Photoshop as the post processing ... the lines merge, black and white is turning gray ...
 
     The best thing that can be said for Rob's images is that he aspires to make them as photorealistic as possible ... that's why he should stay on this list... I have seen CCD originated images that look more "film like" than some convoluted attempts starting with film and trying to make them look digital ...
 
     Those of us who come from a solid film background and who have been on this list for awhile have an edge on our "CCD only" compatriots ... ultimately the techniques that come to bear in making a great photo must be used even if the image had its beginnings as a CCD receptor ... speaking from my own experience, about 20% of a CCD image that I make borrows from pure CCD technology ... the rest is all film.
 
          Tony
_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo