digital vs film

Quick question as I was reading someplace to this effect...does digital take away from sharpness as opposed to film cameras? ....

that is just about the coolest thing I've seen in post IMHO.
specifically what software would be used for this technique?

oyster_photos wrote in post #12526260
that is just about the coolest thing I've seen in post IMHO.
specifically what software would be used for this technique?

Looks like Photoshop.

lmans wrote in post #12525931
Quick question as I was reading someplace to this effect...does digital take away from sharpness as opposed to film cameras? ....

In my opinion, yes and no. Yes in that most digital cameras have anti-aliasing filters which somewhat blur the image in order to counteract moire, decreasing sharpness. These filters aren't used in film cameras. No in that you'll be hard pressed to print a negative (reversal paper) and equal the sharpness you are able to push a digital image to.

That being said, if you can get a great scanner and digitize the film they'll probably be about the same.

Actually, a transparency is the "reversal" process. That's because during transparency processing, what is originally developed as a color-layered negative image is then reversed to a positive.

RDKirk wrote in post #12526549
Actually, a transparency is the "reversal" process. That's because during transparency processing, what is originally developed as a color-layered negative image is then reversed to a positive.

Thanks for the correction and sorry for the misunderstanding. I meant printing using reversal paper.

All of this research about E6 has got me tongue-tied .

Some reading

http://www.normankoren​.com/Tutorials/MTF7.ht​ml

I put a roll through my old 50E 35mm body last week on vacation in Gran Canaria and for various reasons, but emphatically including image quality, I am unlikely ever to repeat the exercise. Digital still photography has revolutionised the hobby/profession in just about every way and I relish each trip out with my gear in a way I never did with film. Sad in a way, but very exciting in many others.

Film still wins in dynamic range and exposure latitude (negative films, anyway). Other than that, digital's tough to beat. With that said, I still shoot film. Right now I have a roll of Portra 160NC in my EOS 3 and a roll of Fuji Superia 200 in my F-1. Should have the done by the weekend and if I get the time I'll develop them by Sunday, too. The scanning is a drag, though.

oyster_photos wrote in post #12526260
that is just about the coolest thing I've seen in post IMHO.
specifically what software would be used for this technique?

I've seen variants of this edge mask sharpening technique at several web sites. The one I adopted was:

http://www.earthboundl​ight.com …sharpen-cs2-and-more.html

In CS5 I first convert a 16 bit image to a smart object, then I apply smart sharpen (generally better than unsharp mask IMO). This automatically applies an editable mask, for the sharpening, and I create my edge mask in that. It works great for portraits as well, where you might want to sharpen the eyelashes, eyes, edges of the teeth, but not the smooth skin areas. I created a Photoshop CS5 action to do it, so it just takes a key press and an adjustment of the layers or curves to control the mask. I use it almost all the time for prints.

If anyone's interested, I'll be happy to post the sequence of steps in my version of this routine.

Tony-S wrote in post #12530124
Film still wins in dynamic range and exposure latitude (negative films, anyway). Other than that, digital's tough to beat. With that said, I still shoot film. Right now I have a roll of Portra 160NC in my EOS 3 and a roll of Fuji Superia 200 in my F-1. Should have the done by the weekend and if I get the time I'll develop them by Sunday, too. The scanning is a drag, though.

You can add tonal smoothness ( especially in B&W ) and highlight degradation to plusses for film.

Tony-S wrote in post #12530124
Film still wins in dynamic range and exposure latitude (negative films, anyway). Other than that, digital's tough to beat. With that said, I still shoot film. Right now I have a roll of Portra 160NC in my EOS 3 and a roll of Fuji Superia 200 in my F-1. Should have the done by the weekend and if I get the time I'll develop them by Sunday, too. The scanning is a drag, though.

Hmmm, my 7D (with about 9-10 stops DR) beats the crap out of Fujichrome Velvia and Sensia (which I have used for many many years), they have about 4-5 stops of DR.

Also I have never found a negative film that spans 10 stops. 7-8 stops, yes.

But you have got me interested in Fuji Superia 200, I'll give it a try!

DutchVince wrote in post #12531032
Hmmm, my 7D (with about 9-10 stops DR) beats the crap out of Fujichrome Velvia and Sensia (which I have used for many many years), they have about 4-5 stops of DR.

Yes, but that's slide film.

Ektar can capture 12 stops. Portra about 14 stops. B&W, properly exposed and developed, about 16 stops.

I wouldn't bother. In the last few years Kodak has smoked Fuji with their new offerings. The only Fuji film I buy now is Acros.

HughR wrote in post #12530948
If anyone's interested, I'll be happy to post the sequence of steps in my version of this routine.

I would very much appreciate that .