Shutterbug Strasse

A photographer's haven for the lastest in digital or traditional film cameras.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Many variables to be considered

Posted by gwkatabatic on April 9, 2004 at 17:23:27:
Such as what type of film were you using? Print or transparency? What speed? What color density? And critically, was it processed properly and printed properly? I have noticed that images from digital cameras seem, to me at least, to be a bit "hot" compared with the results from film (and by that I mean a sharpness to edges where those edges, in reality, may not have been that sharp, but are rendered so by the characteristics of the current crop of CCD's...if that makes sense). I work mainly with black and white, I admit, but have avoided going digital because I simply have not seen an inkjet/dye black and white print that even approaches the look and feel of a silver print. I will grant you that the digital backs for the Hassy's and the Rollei 6000 series are very nice, but I think I can still surpass them with my Rolleiflex 3.5F or Bronica RF645, loaded with TMX, properly processed, and properly printed on Ilford fiber paper. Digitial is convenient, to be sure, and more profitable for professionals. But in my humble (and likely irrelevant) opinion, digital still has problems, but we accept them, as we accept zoom lenses that are not as sharp as prime lenses (and, to relate to this forum, as many accept the convenience of MP3 audio despite its serious shortcomings, and cd's despite their lesser shortcomings). I do believe the day will come, probably soon, when digital surpasses film, and when film will go the way of the cyanotype. But I don't think we're there yet.