can a scanned 35mm from a analog camera be as good as a digital capture?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jim Waggener, Apr 26, 2005.

  1. Jim Waggener

    Jim Waggener Guest

    using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have the
    higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from Velvia film
    captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the best lens beats
    every digital out there.



    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
     
    Jim Waggener, Apr 26, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jim Waggener

    Roy Guest

    here we go again

    "Jim Waggener" <> wrote in message
    news:426d82eb$1_1@127.0.0.1...
    > using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have
    > the higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from
    > Velvia film captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the
    > best lens beats every digital out there.
    >
    >
    > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
    > News==----
    > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
    > Newsgroups
    > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via

    Encryption =----

    Here we go again.

    Another question designed to get everyone hot and bothered, and posting like
    mad.

    Why not just go the whole hog and suggest that a !0 x 8 Glass Neg, scanned
    art 4800 Dpi on the latest Flat Bed is the only way to get real quality in
    digital.

    Who Bloody Cares!

    I like my DSLR, and I still like my 35 SLR, and my 5400 Dpi Film Scanner.

    Roy G
     
    Roy, Apr 26, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jim Waggener

    Stacey Guest

    Jim Waggener wrote:

    > using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have
    > the
    > higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from Velvia
    > film
    > captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the best lens beats
    > every digital out there.
    >


    By a very small margin and then look at the hassle and costs per image
    involved. If you want any sort of real improvement, you should be shooting
    medium format or 4X5, not 35mm film.

    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Apr 26, 2005
    #3
  4. Jim Waggener

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Re: can a scanned 35mm from a analog camera be as good as a digitalcapture?

    Jim Waggener wrote:
    > using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have the
    > higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from Velvia film
    > captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the best lens beats
    > every digital out there.
    >
    >
    >
    > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

    Almost certainly, but on a 600dpi flatbed scanner, probably not. And if
    we are talking about scanning prints, definitely not.


    --
    Ron Hunter
     
    Ron Hunter, Apr 26, 2005
    #4
  5. Jim Waggener

    Shawn Hearn Guest

    In article <426d82eb$1_1@127.0.0.1>,
    "Jim Waggener" <> wrote:

    > using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have the
    > higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from Velvia film
    > captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the best lens beats
    > every digital out there.


    It depends on the capability of the scanner, but a scanned print IS a
    digital image.
     
    Shawn Hearn, Apr 26, 2005
    #5
  6. "Jim Waggener" <> wrote:

    > using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have

    the
    > higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from Velvia

    film

    Velvia 50 doesn't count, since it's been discontinued...

    > captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the best lens beats
    > every digital out there.


    Most of the decent ISO 100 films in 35mm (assuming a sharp lens stopped down
    and a tripod) scanned at 4000 dpi on a dedicated film scanner will capture
    more detail than 6MP dSLRs, but at 8MP the differences are really small.
    Drum scanners or the 5400 dpi Konica Minolta scanner may tip the balance
    back to film from the draw with 8MP.

    This has been quite clear for well over two years now.

    http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF7.html
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dq.shtml

    All of 35mm, 6MP, and 8MP dSLRs make very nice 6x9" prints. At 11x14, none
    of these technologies are anywhere near "photographic quality" in the sense
    of sharp images with more detail than the eye can resolve at normal reading
    distance with good eyesight.

    The interesting thing nowadays is that the Epson R800 and R1800 are capable
    of very close to that level of detail, so for people who appreciate this
    sort of photographic quality, 645/6x7 and a Nikon 9000 still make sense. For
    everyone else, any 8MP dSLR (including the EVOLT) and any Canon/Epson/HP
    photoprinter will make better A4 prints than they've ever seen from 35mm,
    simply because the consumer color films widely available are horrendously
    bad.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Apr 26, 2005
    #6
  7. Jim Waggener

    SimonLW Guest

    Re: here we go again

    "Roy" <> wrote in message
    news:7Cfbe.3069$...
    > "Jim Waggener" <> wrote in message
    > news:426d82eb$1_1@127.0.0.1...
    > > using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have
    > > the higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from
    > > Velvia film captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the
    > > best lens beats every digital out there.
    > >
    > >
    > > ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
    > > News==----
    > > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
    > > Newsgroups
    > > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via

    > Encryption =----
    >
    > Here we go again.
    >
    > Another question designed to get everyone hot and bothered, and posting

    like
    > mad.
    >
    > Why not just go the whole hog and suggest that a !0 x 8 Glass Neg, scanned
    > art 4800 Dpi on the latest Flat Bed is the only way to get real quality in
    > digital.
    >
    > Who Bloody Cares!
    >
    > I like my DSLR, and I still like my 35 SLR, and my 5400 Dpi Film Scanner.
    >
    > Roy G
    >
    >

    What gets me bothered is the Canon/Nikon comment. There are several examples
    of Pentax lenses that are superior to Canon and Nikon. While I have Canon
    equipment and used to use Nikon, I have some Pentax too, and they have some
    fine lenses as well.
    -S
     
    SimonLW, Apr 26, 2005
    #7
  8. In article <426d82eb$1_1@127.0.0.1>, says...
    > using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have the
    > higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from Velvia film
    > captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the best lens beats
    > every digital out there.
    >


    I can't say anything about the quality of digital cameras, but if you
    want to see what the latest generation of 35mm film can do read my
    little tip here:
    http://robertdfeinman.com/tips/tip25.html
    Follow the link back to the main tips page for other discussions of film
    scanning.

    With color negative film and the Minolta 5400 dpi scanner and printing
    at 300dpi excellent prints can be made at 18x magnification. This is
    better than I was ever able to do via conventional enlarging. That's
    an 18x27 inch print. I used to be happy with good 11x14 from slides.

    --
    Robert D Feinman
    Landscapes, Cityscapes and Panoramic Photographs
    http://robertdfeinman.com
    mail:
     
    Robert Feinman, Apr 26, 2005
    #8
  9. Jim Waggener

    Lionel Guest

    On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:49:56 -0400, in <426d82eb$1_1@127.0.0.1>, "Jim
    Waggener" <> said:

    [film vs digital trolling]

    **** off, troll.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Apr 26, 2005
    #9
  10. Jim Waggener

    GazT Guest

    "Jim Waggener" <> wrote in message
    news:426d82eb$1_1@127.0.0.1...
    | using of course, a high end drum scanner. which do you think would have
    the
    | higher resolution, clarity and focus? I think a drum scan from Velvia
    film
    | captured with a Canon/Nikon High end film camera with the best lens beats
    | every digital out there.


    Iv'e been printing images from the D2X lately and I think it surpasses 35mm
    and is approaching 120 quality.

    Gaz.
     
    GazT, Aug 2, 2005
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Aim High

    No time date stamp analog capture

    Aim High, Sep 20, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    971
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=
    Sep 20, 2004
  2. P G
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    512
    Tom Monego
    Dec 30, 2003
  3. Peng Yu
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    383
    Vidar Grønvold
    Jul 7, 2004
  4. Linda Donovan
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    6,675
    Bill in Co.
    Jun 20, 2004
  5. Replies:
    8
    Views:
    607
Loading...

Share This Page