 Jnaneshwar Surabathula |
Enlargements - Film vs Digital A few days ago I've been told by a photographer friend of mine that enlargements (24" x 30" or more)made from a negative is much better than from a digital file. Most of the negatives capture fine details where as from a digital file it would appear grainy. Has anyone tried this? I'd appreciate if one can throw light on it?
|
|
|
|
||
|
John G. Clifford Jr |
How big is the negative? How big is the digital file? There's been enough testing to determine that somewhere between 6 and 8 MP gives the same print quality as 35mm print film. Film may capture slightly more detail, but digital is 'smoother' and loses less detail due to grain. I've made beautiful 10x15 prints from a 4.3 MP camera, and have no doubt I could go up to 14x21 without having visible degradation. I have a 6x27 panorama (4.5:1 ratio) that is incredibly detailed and sharp. So, it all depends on what you start with, and your post-processing skills. A 24x30 print is a LARGE print, and don't let anyone tell you different. However, if you're viewing it from a distance of more than a foot or so, I'd be willing to bet that my 4.3 MP camera and most 10 MP cameras could do an excellent job... not as good as medium format film, but certainly as good or better than 35mm film.
|
|
|
|
||
|
John P. Sandstedt |
With a film camera [35 mm,] you start with a 24X36 mm negative or slide. In the dark room, using an enlarger, most people can produce great 8X12s. But, I think that once this size is exceeded things start to go down hill. In any case, you need a very sharp negative, usually take with ISO-100 film, taken with your camera set on a tripod. Yes, we've probably all seen one or more large, poster size images made from negatives - but, that's more of an exception than a rule. John's comments about 10X15s produced with a 4.3 MP camera is similar to mine. In fact, with a littel work I made a 13X19 from a 3 MP camera - it was more than acceptable. But, you'll be able to create larger prints and posters using digital than with a negative.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tareq M. Alhamrani |
I believe that I printed 2 photos taken by my 8MP camera to a size of A1 or about 24x30", I was using ISO 640 for both photos, I got blown away for the quality of the image, printed on Matte paper, looks like so clean and nice clarity, so if I do shoot with my 12/16 MP cameras and using ISO 100 and blow up to 24x36 then I am sure I will have high quality prints on different papers if the printing is excellent, I was thinking in the past that I have to buy the biggest MP or large format to print photos minimum 1m width.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jnaneshwar Surabathula |
Thanks for the response. I have posted the same question on luminous landscape for which there was an overwhelming response with a lot of opinons. Here's the link- http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=20152 I guess one has to decide for oneself what looks good in the image shot with both digital and film cameras and then go in for the desired size of print.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||