although that ship has long sailed, here goes: well, analogue film had resolving power, which was measured in lines/mm and digital, of course,
has resolution (in megapixels). apples and oranges. film was not made to
be scanned digitally, but to be enlarged optically. After 2 years of
film , I had foorgotten how good it was, after almost 20 years of
digital photography. With a hand held flash shot, in Agfapan APX 400,
regular grain, not T-grain I made a succesful enlargement in 30 X 40,
only the focus of the enlarger was a bit tricky as I had to open the
diaphgram to get an acceptable exposure (30 secs @ F 5.6).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/29/20 10:34 AM, Dimitris Tzortzakakis wrote:

although that ship has long sailed, here goes: well, analogue film had resolving power, which was measured in lines/mm and digital, of course,
has resolution (in megapixels). apples and oranges. film was not made to
be scanned digitally, but to be enlarged optically. After 2 years of
film , I had foorgotten how good it was, after almost 20 years of
digital photography. With a hand held flash shot, in Agfapan APX 400,
regular grain, not T-grain I made a succesful enlargement in 30 X 40,
only the focus of the enlarger was a bit tricky as I had to open the diaphgram to get an acceptable exposure (30 secs @ F 5.6).

Welcome back to the "dark side". (Dark side = darkroom)

I respectfully disagree with "apples and oranges". I say it's more like
two different types of apples. Also, megapixels doesn't directly give resolution, but it's a good indicator of it.

This summer, I had the opportunity to move back to my old home town. I
looked at about a dozen houses, but the one I bought had a perfect*
space for a darkroom. Once I saw that space, I knew I had to have that
house!

* It seemed perfect. On later inspection, I found that I had to remove
door frames from two doors to get my color processor in the darkroom!
Removing and re-installing door frames is not that difficult.

--
Ken Hart
kwhart1@frontier.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Στις 30/12/2020 6:28 μ.μ., ο/η Ken Hart έγραψε:

On 12/29/20 10:34 AM, Dimitris Tzortzakakis wrote:

although that ship has long sailed, here goes: well, analogue film had
resolving power, which was measured in lines/mm and digital, of
course, has resolution (in megapixels). apples and oranges. film was
not made to be scanned digitally, but to be enlarged optically. After
2 years of film , I had foorgotten how good it was, after almost 20
years of digital photography. With a hand held flash shot, in Agfapan
APX 400, regular grain, not T-grain I made a succesful enlargement in
30 X 40, only the focus of the enlarger was a bit tricky as I had to
open the diaphgram to get an acceptable exposure (30 secs @ F 5.6).

Welcome back to the "dark side". (Dark side = darkroom)

I respectfully disagree with "apples and oranges". I say it's more like
two different types of apples. Also, megapixels doesn't directly give resolution, but it's a good indicator of it.

This summer, I had the opportunity to move back to my old home town. I
looked at about a dozen houses, but the one I bought had a perfect*
space for a darkroom. Once I saw that space, I knew I had to have that
house!

* It seemed perfect. On later inspection, I found that I had to remove
door frames from two doors to get my color processor in the darkroom! Removing and re-installing door frames is not that difficult.

you're right, I read that film had more resolving power than most usual
lenses (I suppose that includes primes because that's a '77 book, before
zooms became so widespread). In Kozani I had a flat that had the perfect
space for a darkroom, back at the day. I was also doing colour back
then. Kozani was in the main lignite mining area of Greece, 75% of
Greece's electrical energy was generated there. I believe that today's "cameras" are not cameras anymore, but computers with lenses, and that's
not "photography", but computerography! In Kozani there was a little
Kodak shop, run by a girl called Mary, that had everything!From bulk
film, to Technical pan, to infrared, to blank tapes, everything. Now
it's gone, alas. Likewise here, In Iraklion-Crete, we used to have also
a little shop, called Vretzos, now also gone. Everything must be
back-ordered from Athens or even from Germany.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On the resolution of film, check out Ken's article : https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.htm

It's a bit dated, but the principles are still valid.

Also check out this interview. https://youtu.be/Uizuh5S3bVE?t=1777 About 29 minutes in, Tyler talks about how clients who don't know the difference between film and digital based prints choose film each and every time without knowing it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/29/2020 10:34 AM, Dimitris Tzortzakakis wrote:

although that ship has long sailed, here goes: well, analogue film had resolving power, which was measured in lines/mm and digital, of course,
has resolution (in megapixels). apples and oranges. film was not made to
be scanned digitally, but to be enlarged optically. After 2 years of
film , I had foorgotten how good it was, after almost 20 years of
digital photography. With a hand held flash shot, in Agfapan APX 400,
regular grain, not T-grain I made a succesful enlargement in 30 X 40,
only the focus of the enlarger was a bit tricky as I had to open the diaphgram to get an acceptable exposure (30 secs @ F 5.6).

transparency films have much more dynamic range?



--
Minister Dale Kelly, Ph.D.
https://www.dalekelly.org/
Board Certified Holistic Health Practitioner
Board Certified Alternative Medical Practitioner

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2/7/2021 11:40 AM, dale wrote:

On 12/29/2020 10:34 AM, Dimitris Tzortzakakis wrote:

although that ship has long sailed, here goes: well, analogue film had
resolving power, which was measured in lines/mm and digital, of
course, has resolution (in megapixels). apples and oranges. film was
not made to be scanned digitally, but to be enlarged optically. After
2 years of film , I had foorgotten how good it was, after almost 20
years of digital photography. With a hand held flash shot, in Agfapan
APX 400, regular grain, not T-grain I made a succesful enlargement in
30 X 40, only the focus of the enlarger was a bit tricky as I had to
open the diaphgram to get an acceptable exposure (30 secs @ F 5.6).

transparency films have much more dynamic range?

some negative films have more than one stop of exposure on its dynamic
range?

more dynamic range than one regular image?

then there is push/pull processing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_range

"The exposure range of a device is usually expressed in stops, which are equivalent to {\displaystyle \log _{2}(c)}\log _{{2}}(c) where c is the
medium or device's contrast ratio. For example, average Digital Video
(DV) has a contrast ratio of 45:1, so its exposure range is roughly 5.5
stops. Film has an exposure range of approximately 14 stops."

--
Minister Dale Kelly, Ph.D.
https://www.dalekelly.org/
Board Certified Holistic Health Practitioner
Board Certified Alternative Medical Practitioner

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)