Digital BW, The Print

Alan writes:


> 1. Sharpness - absolutely no contest. The D30
> image was significantly sharper than scanned film.

It will be, if you compared the raw scan to the digital image.  Downsample
the scan in steps to match the digital image size, and USM at each step.
Then you might see something different.

I've just compared some of my Provia 100F scans to D30 images, and the
Provia scans win easily.  This is particularly true when I start looking at
things like color resolution (the D30 fringes a lot and shows a lot of
coarse noise, whereas the scans have no fringing, fine color detail, and
very fine noise).

> 2. Resolution - again, no contest here either.
> The D30 image clearly revealed finer details.

See above.

> 3. Grain - The scanned film showed obvious grain--
> resulting in reduced edge definition, too--where
> the D30 was just about "grain" (noise) free.

See above.

> Bottom line...I'm now fully convinced that the D30,
> in particular, and I'm sure any of the most recent
> DSLR offerings from Canon/Nikon/Fuji, clearly
> blows away 35mm film scanned on ANY scanner for
> prints up to 13x19.

So have you sold all your film equipment?

> Therefore, if Micheal Riechmann says that the Canon
> 1Ds compares favorably with MF so be it!

Who is Michael Riechmann, and why is his word more reliable than direct
experiment?