on 12/9/2002 4:00 PM, filmscanners_Digest_owner@halftone.co.uk at
filmscanners_Digest_owner@halftone.co.uk wrote:
> Of course, you do realize that your contention is as subjective as those
> made by those who may disagree with you. The out which you have left
> yourself is equally subjective - namely, "There is a difference, and, to the
> discerning eye, it is obvious." Who is the arbiter of who has a discerning
> enough eye and who does not should an argument ensue about if there is a
> difference or not? You are entitled to your opinion and evaluation as well
> as to your preferences; but as with all of us, there are personal
> preferences. The most that can be said about them is that they are yours -
> not that they are better than any other preferences.
Since I've been using my ls-8000 and shooting 6x9 I have become a little
dissatisfied with my 35 images. And I'm talking about printing smaller than
8x10 on an epson printer. The difference in detail is very obvious and does
not need a discerning eye to see.
I will still shoot 35mm, but not for the same kind of images that I'll use
the 6x9 camera for. I'm just blown away by the difference between 35mm
scanned at 4000dpi and 6x9 even in small prints.
-Bruce
Visit my website at:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
