Quote of the decade about film vs. digital

[Messsucherkamera]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Regarding monochrom M obsession, thus spake Eric Kim in his review:

"...if you are having Leica M Monochrom envy or really want it - remember, this concept of a 'black-and-white only sensor' isn’t new. They used to call it Kodak Tri-X film."

 

Link: Review of the Leica M-Monochrom for Street Photography — Eric Kim Street Photography

[earleygallery]

Not quite right. The MM gives you a digital image. You need to use the software they supply to imitate Tri-X.

 

If I want the Tri-X look, I'd rather just use Tri-X!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

And digital Tri-X will look like scanned real Tri-X anyway, not like the real thing. The number of persons who have actually seen an all-the-way chemical print is declining rapidly.

[j. borger]

And digital Tri-X will look like scanned real Tri-X anyway ...........

 

Disagree completely! Although i agree nothing beats a complete analog workgflow.

[cocker]

And digital Tri-X will look like scanned real Tri-X anyway, not like the real thing.

 

I disagree. MM output Tri-X'ed will not look like scanned Tri-X. A subtext to the MM hype is that really its the new Black & White film - it isn't.

[CalArts 99]

I also disagree. A frame of Tri-X drum scanned and printed out with a laser printer on Ilford digital fiber paper looks extraordinary.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I disagree. MM output Tri-X'ed will not look like scanned Tri-X. A subtext to the MM hype is that really its the new Black & White film - it isn't.

Not my point. I find it uninteresting to get digital to look like film.I don't even want the MM to look like film. It is a new look in digital B&W and will take that discipline a step further. My point was that scanned film is not the same as film processed chemically all the way through.

[jaapv]

I also disagree. A frame of Tri-X drum scanned and printed out with a laser printer on Ilford digital fiber paper looks extraordinary.

Quite true - but still not the same as a perfect darkroom print.

[andybarton]

If I were to buy an MM, I would leave the FX software in the box. I don't want a faux-film look from my digital shots - if I want a film look, I use film.

 

I do scan my film, and print on the desktop, as a darkroom is a luxury that I don't have.

[jaapv]

Disagree completely! Although i agree nothing beats a complete analog workgflow.

If you agree about the analog workflow what are you disagreeing with then?

[cocker]

My point was that scanned film is not the same as film processed chemically all the way through.

 

Undoubtedly true - but "reductio ad absurdum" in my view.

[CalArts 99]

Quite true - but still not the same as a perfect darkroom print.

 

I've always wondered about that. A laser print is printed on paper that is chemically processed. I'd like to compare a negative that has been printed on a Lambda or Océ and one that is from a conventional enlarger. The papers are very close other than the emulsion that is used for the different light sources. I'm not so sure that one could really tell the difference, but maybe so.

[j. borger]

If you agree about the analog workflow what are you disagreeing with then?

 

About digital files processed to look like TRIX actually looking like Scanned TRIX film ..... but you already stated that was not what you actually meant when more people disagreed with that statement. So now we agree

[jaapv]

Undoubtedly true - but "reductio ad absurdum" in my view.

I still think chemical printing is not absurd

 

Anyway, I have doubts about the hybrid workflow. Excluding (maybe) drum scanning, which is not standard practice, if only for the price, scanning, photoshopping and inkjet printing introduces the drawbacks of both digital and analog into the process.

I think best results will be reached by sticking to the full workflows, be it silicon or silver based.

@ Lambda print, that is still a digital process, even if the paper is developed by chemicals.

[jaapv]

About digital files processed to look like TRIX actually looking like Scanned TRIX film ..... but you already stated that was not what you actually meant when more people disagreed with that statement. So now we agree

Yeah - the words "at best somewhat" were in my mind but did not make into the post

[wattsy]

Anyway, I have doubts about the hybrid workflow. Excluding (maybe) drum scanning, which is not standard practice, if only for the price, scanning, photoshopping and inkjet printing introduces the drawbacks of both digital and analog into the process.

I think best results will be reached by sticking to the full workflows, be it silicon or silver based.

@ Lambda print, that is still a digital process, even if the paper is developed by chemicals.

 

It's not the first time you've made this point in recent weeks but I don't remember you making it before (despite the "hybrid workflow" being commonly practised for more than a decade). It strikes me that your argument is some part of a 'cart before the horse' justification for getting the MM.

[jaapv]

As I made it repeatedly years before the MM was even conceived? I must have written this a dozen times since 2006.

A bit twisted, don't you think?

[wattsy]

A bit twisted, don't you think?

 

Not really. I don't remember you complaining about the "hybrid workflow" before the MM was announced. It's as if you are creating a problem (for the MM to solve) that never really existed.

[jaapv]

25-06-2007 - and many more posts since....

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/27480-integrity-film.html#post290335

 

You really must start reading before asserting...

Edited July 10, 2012 by jaapv

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wattsy]

Ok, fair enough, I take back my last point.

 

That said, I still don't really see the connection between the "problem" of a hybrid workflow and the development of the MM. That latter is, after all, just another digital camera.