help me settle an argument « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

help me settle an argument

(32 posts) (16 voices)

Tags:

No tags yet.

« Previous 12

TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

MSmoto now you are trying to move it to another argument. That one is on another thread somewhere. ;)

Just on Digital technology (not exclusive to cameras), it can surpass film depending your setup. There is now 96-bit color scanning which can scan a color gamut way beyond any single film type can record. I heard many times 24 bit color scanners could out resolve, out color record most if not all films. Consider DSLRs 14bit raw color of the D800 is only 25bits of color info recorded - and that is one of the best ever tested. Only a few MedFmt cameras have hit that high. Camera's have a long way to go to catch up with the capabilities that exist in the rest of the digital realm.

If anyone still thinks "Film" is so great - Just look to the movies - Avatar - The color blows your mind because it was created 100% digitally and viewed digitally. No film type could have ever captured anything like that.

Posted 1 year ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

TaoTeJared said:
MSmoto now you are trying to move it to another argument. That one is on another thread somewhere. ;)

If anyone still thinks "Film" is so great - Just look to the movies - Avatar - The color blows your mind because it was created 100% digitally and viewed digitally. No film type could have ever captured anything like that.

Gotcha.... and I agree with your opinion fully. We used to have to plate our own glass with silver.... oh, you're not that old, ha, ha,ha...

But the idea is the image capture technology is now digital and film is basically gone except for special purposes. And I used to shoot that 11"x14" Ektachrome, so it is a bit sad.....

Posted 1 year ago #
Willis

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 1,123
offline

I gotta say though, much like records vs. CD's, even if the technical quality is better w/ digital, there is an organic quality to film that you just can't get with digital... at least not without post-processing (maybe those stupid photo-shop disclosure laws in europe will bring back the film industry LOL). I definitely think there's something to be said for the film look.

Posted 1 year ago #
Pierre

preferred member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 1,023
offline

As the

Willis said:
... I definitely think there's something to be said for the film look.

Likewise with the dinosaurs, and I am equally happy I do not have to deal with either :-)
Pro-film arguments gives me skin rash and brings back many bad and painful memories.

Posted 1 year ago #
Ade Barkah

preferred member
Joined: Apr '11
Posts: 108
offline

TaoTeJared said:
There is now 96-bit color scanning which can scan a color gamut way beyond any single film type can record. I heard many times 24 bit color scanners could out resolve, out color record most if not all films. Consider DSLRs 14bit raw color of the D800 is only 25bits of color info recorded - and that is one of the best ever tested. Only a few MedFmt cameras have hit that high. Camera's have a long way to go to catch up with the capabilities that exist in the rest of the digital realm.

That's a bit misleading. Just because a scanner is marketed as 96-bits doesn't mean it can accurately resolve 96-bits of color depth (not even close!) It's mostly a marketing gimmick.

Consider that one can buy many of these 96-bit scanners (such as the HP Scanjet series) for like $200 new. Inside these scanners you'll find cheap CCD sensors (it has to be cheap, considering the whole unit is only $200). Using filters, this cheap CCD is used to scan 6 colors, and the analog results are converted to digital using a 16-bit ADC. That's how we get 6x16 = 96 bits.

But we all know that just because we can stick a cheap 16-bit ADC to a cheap CCD sensor, it doesn't mean we're getting accurate 16-bit color discrimination per channel. Quantity vs. quality. Marketing vs. Reality.

The sophisticated CMOS sensors and ADCs used in the D800 / D4 are vastly superior to anything in these cheap 96-bit scanners. I'd say the D800 sensor compares favorably even against the CCDs in the $20,000+ Hasselblad Flextight scanner (considered the best by many). The Hasselblad, by the way, is not 96-bit. ;-)

So I'd disagree that camera tech has a long ways to "catch up" to scanner tech.

Lastly, the human eye can only discriminate about 24-bits of color. So except during post-processing, anything more than 24-bits is wasted anyway.

Posted 1 year ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

Pierre said:
Pro-film arguments gives me skin rash and brings back many bad and painful memories.

For me, it bring back memories of snogging in the darkroom

Posted 1 year ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

sevencrossing said:
For me, it bring back memories of snogging in the darkroom

Snogging, snogging, what the heck is snagging..... from a girl raised in South Dakota... unless....

Back to the discussion. I may have mentioned on this forum about my experiences with folks who are into what is called "High End Audio". These are the folks who have anywhere from $25,000 to $250,000 in their audio gear/rooms,etc. Some have "tube" equipment. Speakers cost up to $50,000 EACH. And, they actually think they can hear the difference between their system and a good system costing less than $10,000. Interestingly enough, these "High End" folks will never enter in to a double blind study to determine whether the difference can actually be heard or if it is primarily in their imagination. And, this is exactly where I think we are when we discuss the differences between film and digital.

It is my opinion (same value as yours) that if we shoot a job with digital and film, equal quality lens, body, etc. and go through the same process of producing the final product... say a billboard of 20' x 40', not one of us will be able to tell the difference. Or, make 30" x 40" color prints. Again, I am doubtful anyone can tell the difference. So, let the games begin. If anyone knows of a comparison study, please let me know either here or via PM. Thanks, Ms. Tommie Lauer

And snogging...mmmm.... I looked it up... always used the model dressing rooms....

Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

« Previous 12

Reply

You must log in to post.

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.

help me settle an argument

Reply