Digital BW, The Print

For now, and perhaps long-term, we will just have to accept 
differences between digital capture and scanned film. In my 
experience as a first time digital camera user (D100), the results up 
to 12 x 18 print size are at least acceptable from my D-SLR. The 
look, however, is different from film captured images. To me, the 
differences are akin (but not identical) to the differences between 
35 mm and LF systems. Each is capable of compelling photographs, yet 
produce aesthetically different prints. Add to that the 
practicalities, such as portability, ability to be spontaneous (hand-
held), degree of enlargement, depth of focus, on, and on.  So, I do 
not expect my D100 to produce results identical to my film based 35 
mm system. I am hoping it is capable of producing compelling prints; 
and if it has this potential, whether or not I get compelling prints, 
is all up to me - the guy behind the viewfinder.

Best wishes.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "charles_bandes" 
<byronbulb@y...> wrote:
> Yeah, it's all a question of your standards and expectations. 
> 
> I must say though that the relative lack of noise and grain from the
> digital cameras goes a long way to increasing the final detail level
> compared to film. Even 4000 dpi scans from hasselblad negs done at 
my
> portrait lab have _tons_ more noise/grain than I get with the S2. 
Mind
> you, they have a lot more resolution, but a lot of that resolution 
is
> being used to resolve grain patterns, which isn't helpful (imho) in 
a
> final print. 
> 
> I'm of the opinion that one can make great 20x24" prints in-darkroom
> from 35mm negs - other people tell me that 35mm is not useful past
> 11x14" - we probably have different standards. The same is probably
> true here. I am delighted with the 12x18" prints I have been making
> from the S2. I probably wouldn't be happy with them at 30x40" - it's
> possible that you would think that my prints are soft or lacking in
> detail, but my clients and viewers have been happy, and that's what
> matters to me :)
> 
> I won't be badmouthing film anytime soon, I really really really 
miss
> doing darkroom work, but the digital stuff just makes more sense for
> the moment.
> 
> > I agree with very sharp, any image can be made to be very sharp, 
film or
> > digital, but I question "highly" detailed at 13x19.  "Quite" 
detailed,
> > yes...and I'm sure they look pretty good, but I think you 
oversell the
> > ability of these digital cameras to capture "real" image detail.
> > 
> > The D60 has a 3152 x 2068 sensor, and it's an interpolated Bayer 
pattern
> > sensor.  Anyway, 2068 along a 13" side gives you only ~160 PPI to 
the
> > printer, which is somewhat marginally sufficient.  Whether 
you "rez"
> up or
> > not, rezzing up can't create detail that was not captured by the 
imaging
> > device in the first place.
> > 
> > One or two more generations of digicams (probably 16M pixels) and
> I'll buy
> > "highly" for a 35mm size digicam on a 13 x 19 ;-)
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Austin