Am I making the wrong decision

Winslowe said:
If I have to fuss it up on a computer to get a decent image I'll pass on Micro4/3.
Click to expand...


What's the difference between post-processing an image caught on film in a dark room, to post-processing a digital one on a computer?
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I think that would depend a great deal on the size of the image file and the qualities of the monitor. The images here are limited to 500KB, which makes the comparison rather biased.
Click to expand...
92MB TIFFs look pretty good on my monitor, but I prefer my chromes.
 
wornish said:
What's the difference between post-processing an image caught on film in a dark room, to post-processing a digital one on a computer?
Click to expand...
Not much. But I'm no artist - if I cannot compose, expose and develop a negative or transparency to be printed straight or viewed directly, it goes into the circular file. I view digital as a welcome substitute for Polaroid film.
 
Winslowe said:
Not much. But I'm no artist - if I cannot compose, expose and develop a negative or transparency to be printed straight or viewed directly, it goes into the circular file. I view digital as a welcome substitute for Polaroid film.
Click to expand...
I view digital as a welcome withdrawal from inhaling dubious chemicals in a darkened room - and yes, I’ve done plenty of that …
 
Winslowe said:
92MB TIFFs look pretty good on my monitor, but I prefer my chromes.
Click to expand...
You arouse my curiosity.

How big a monitor do you have and who do you share these files with?
 
nandbytes said:
Now I get why some people are so happy with film processing on this forum
Click to expand...
Darned Hydroquinone junkies.

Mind you, the dangerous ones are those who use Metol. You don't want to get between one of them and their developing tank! :naughty: :coat:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top