Re: [photo-3d] Re: No more Kodachrome

[Mike Kersenbrock <michaelk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

gccampos@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Does this mean I should save my insurance Moola and buy digital
> instead of replacing my RBT S1?
> 
> Grant

Certainly, if the quality is up to your standards *including*
the entire system from original subject to eyeballs.  As I've
suggested before in previous threads in the last few years, the
biggest problem for digital is the viewing "system", and this is
a bit harder for 3D. I haven't yet seen anything anywhere matching
film for personal 3D work, despite claims to the contrary.

Right now, digital has some advantages -- biggest one is being able
to deliver images to millions over an internet page, something
difficult with film "natively".  This is good and is something
that should be pursued even if not the ultimate in quality. But
probably not exclusively.

So, for some uses, digital will work (particularly for web
mass-sharing) and to some extent stereo-card making via the
Fuji digital printer that has been mentioned.  But unless
that's ALL that you're after, it might not do the trick if
used exclusively.

So if you have a way of viewing your work from a system with
a digital "front-end" that satisfies all of your viewing 
quality requirements, then go for it.  

Mike K.

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/