SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Aug 11, 2011 18:53:17 GMT -5
The Mountains of Mourne, Ulster, the highest is Slieve Donard This is Slieve Donard from the north: We'd been walking on the lower slope of Slieve Donard and returning to the road found an ambulance waiting at the end. The crew waved, we waved back, they said they'd been called out to fetch someone off the mountain with a sprained foot. Was it me? Hm. We continued down a grass slope and guess who catches his foot in a tussock, flying headlong. It must have appeared even more dramatic as I looked around for a good spot to land on, let go of the hiking poles, screwed round in mind-air grabbing the camera in one hand, and rolled round a few turns. The ambulance crew were there at once and got me on my feet again. We continued downhill towards the town, and were overtaken by a helicopter landing in a nearby schoolfield with the hiker and his sprained foot: I should add I had a student friend 50 years ago who was a paratrooper who decided I needed to be taught how to fall. I must have had a habit of catching my foot in tussocks even then. PS: which pictures are film and which digital?
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 11, 2011 19:26:44 GMT -5
Sid, an amusing anecdote.
The answer to your question is, like CD audio, they are all digital for the final viewing.
|
|
PeterW
Lifetime Member
Member has Passed
Posts: 3,804
|
Post by PeterW on Aug 12, 2011 9:02:12 GMT -5
Sid,
In the words of the immortal Fats Waller:
"Yo feet's too big!"
PeterW
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Aug 12, 2011 10:09:16 GMT -5
... Fats Waller: "Yo feet's too big!" ... Peter, they're quite standard, my size shoe never comes up in a sale.
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Aug 12, 2011 10:30:30 GMT -5
... The answer to your question is, like CD audio, they are all digital for the final viewing Thanks Dave, the obvious response. So much depends on the quality of a scan from film. Some scanners are quite noisy. This alone can be enough to make a film original stand out in a comparison. On top of that scanning places a pixel matrix on top of the molecular structure of the emulsion, with possible interference effects in the result. That's what finally tipped the balance in favour of my first digital camera - realizing that there was only one quantization.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 12, 2011 13:31:22 GMT -5
At the summer exhibition of a local photo club last year there were some prints that stood out form the others. These were 'proper' photographic prints. The digital prints were good, but could not match the well done analogue prints. I suppose it all means that the medium used should suit the way it's being viewed.
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Aug 13, 2011 18:22:19 GMT -5
For the record, the first is Kodachrome 200, 2001, EOS 1000FN.
The others are Canon G11, May 2011.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 13, 2011 19:05:12 GMT -5
Sid, my guess was No 3 was digital but I couldn't make my mind up on the other two.
On the other hand I could have cheated.
I don't know if others are aware but the EXIF is usually retained with the photo. If the photo is saved to the hard drive it is possible, via properties, to bring up the information about the photo. (Unless the owner has elected not to save the EXIF with the file.) A scan of a negative or print will have information as to when the file was made, but little else.
|
|