Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
alt.philosophy only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

alt.philosophy Profile…
 Up
Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: Trent Thorax
Date: Apr 15, 2008 22:42

All those megapixels and still traditional methods are superior.

Zeno's paradox, anyone?

-Trent
22 Comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: Bob Williams
Date: Apr 15, 2008 22:57

Trent Thorax wrote:
> All those megapixels and still traditional methods are superior.
>
> Zeno's paradox, anyone?
>
>
> -Trent
Surely, you jest......or .......troll.
Bob Williams
no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: Alfred Molon
Date: Apr 15, 2008 22:58

In article aioe.org>, Trent Thorax says...
> All those megapixels and still traditional methods are superior.

They have surpassed film quality a long time ago.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: Mr. Strat
Date: Apr 16, 2008 05:00

In article aioe.org>, Trent Thorax
marveljack.com> wrote:
> All those megapixels and still traditional methods are superior.

The large prints on my wall prove your theory is bullshit.
no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: John
Date: Apr 16, 2008 06:05

"Trent Thorax" marveljack.com> wrote in message
news:fu43kj$ui5$8@aioe.org...
> All those megapixels and still traditional methods are superior.

A statement that requires a date-stamp to define 'traditional'. April 16,
2008. There ya go.

Film and digital are different. Some people have entirely different
standards regarding quality. Quality is not necessarily simple metrics such
as lp/mm, acutance, and the longest tonal range (measured from dmin to dmax
plus a separate metric for the curve) or the present and temporary issue of
lens problems, especially wide, fast lenses with the digital sensor. If a
person cannot see the difference, for better or worse, then so be it.

OB Philosophy: Arguments are made of words and no amount of words can change
a picture. Leave it at that and make your pictures with what you choose.
no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: Joseph Meehan
Date: Apr 16, 2008 06:41

I suppose that some people believe apples are superior to oranges.
Others believe oranges are better. Some people don't understand.

"Trent Thorax" marveljack.com> wrote in message
news:fu43kj$ui5$8@aioe.org...
> All those megapixels and still traditional methods are superior.
>
> Zeno's paradox, anyone?
>
>
> -Trent

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit
no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: Alfred Molon
Date: Apr 16, 2008 07:31

In article <48060214$0$4098$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Joseph Meehan
says...
> I suppose that some people believe apples are superior to oranges.
> Others believe oranges are better. Some people don't understand.

That depends on the apple. Some apples are better than some oranges.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: ray
Date: Apr 16, 2008 08:20

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:42:04 -0700, Trent Thorax wrote:
> All those megapixels and still traditional methods are superior.
>
> Zeno's paradox, anyone?
>
>
> -Trent

Which is 'better' film or digital? Which is 'better' a Mercedes or a dump
truck? It depends, to a large extent, on what you are trying to do. IMHO
neither film nor digital is 'superior' - they each have their place.
no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: measekite
Date: Apr 16, 2008 09:11

no comments
Re: Why aren't digital cameras film-quality yet?         


Author: ray
Date: Apr 16, 2008 10:23

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:11:25 +0000, measekite wrote:
>
>
> > http-equiv="Content-Type">
>
>
Show full article (1.85Kb)
no comments
1 2 3