[QUOTE=bob J] Question, I have a great Nikon SLR. When you purchase film now, you can purchase a package that gives you prints and digital pictures on a CD. Are the images on this CD the quality of a picture taken with a digital camera?
Thanks,[/QUOTE]
In theory, the quality's there for the right scanner to extract. In practice...things can be a little fiddlier. It depends on the the quality of the film processing, and above all the scanning setup/resolution they use. Shooting in RAW on a digital SLR provides you with what's essentially a digital negative; you can make adjustments to exposure, highlights, lowlights, correct for lens abberations, correct colour temperature, tint, saturation, hue, all non-destructively (no permanent changes made to the files). And that's in addition to being able to set 'film speed' per shot, as needed. With film, you shoot, which determines your exposure with somewhat more finality (you always try to get the shot right the first time, of course, but that doesn't always work) and your film and film developer determine the rest of the look. Post-processing in photoshop will always be destructive.
All that said, if you know your camera, your film SLR can and will take just as good pictures as a digital SLR. It's less flexible, but the quality's there.
Another consideration: if you take a lot of pictures, film's really not that cheap. Especially if you get others to do the developing for you. I've taken a hair under 8000 shots with my now 2 year old DSLR, of course about a full 1/3 of those (at least) are redundancies (why take one photo if you can take 2 or 3, and pick the best one?), and I only print off the shots I really like. The cameras are more expensive, but the cost of ownership doesn't have to be higher.
Just my 2 cents.
|
