P3D Re: slide film or neg film?

[michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxx (Michael Kersenbrock)]

> In the present and even near-term world digital, we will: (a) still want
> to use film, and (b) our choice of film will still be nagative film.
> Here's why:
> 
> (a) We will still want to use film because it has a greater contrast
> range and higher resolution than digital cameras can currently capture.
~
> 
> (b) We want negative film because is has twice the contrast range of
> slide film, roughly 6 stops versus 12 stops! This provides that a
~

Seems like most "photographers" like the picture if they can recognize 
their relatives in the shots.  Would that massive market care anything
about dynamic range ?   Or know what that meant?


> What negative film does not provide, as mentioned by others, is a visual
> color reference. 

I think one of the more powerful reasons to use it, although with the
popularity of Fuji chromes and copiers, the "reference" colors aren't
exactly the same as the true reference (the scene in real life).

But closer than looking at the negative.  :-)


> Newspapers such as the Boston Globe do almost all of their photography
> on color negative, scan, and go digital from there. I know some
> magazines go this way as well, but most still use chromes because of the
> color reference thang.

I thought there was at least some newspapers using digital cameras directly
now -- with the low screen values used for newspapers (65?) being achievable
using current digital cameras.  Seemed like a hint of the future (purely
a WAG on my part, however).


Mike K.


> 
> 
> Eric G.
> 
> 


------------------------------