On 3 Jun 2003 at 16:28, Christian Skofteland wrote: > Film v digital: (tv, take note to what a Bethesda wedding photographer has to > say about digital's ability to hold detail in the highlights. > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60430-2003May30.html
The other interesting quote was: "Philip Brookman, the Corcoran Gallery of Art's senior curator for photography and media arts, has his own complaint with the output of digital cameras. 'I think that digital images have a flatness to them, and you can see the difference if you're looking for it,' he said." This sounds like nonsense. I believe that apart from the occasional instances of excessive sharpening the digital look may simply be a function of contrast manipulation. If a digital image has a similar response and gamma to film (or has a film gamma transformation applied) then no one should be able to tell the difference. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
