How do former Film user find the results of digital prints ?


Status
Not open for further replies.

kex

Senior Member
Oct 16, 2002
2,078
0
36
beebox
www.beebox.com.sg
#1
i been using film for a long time,i had a few digital cameras which i find the results disappointing leh..especially for enalrgements.
Any satisfied digital users ard ?
problems i find iritating in digital results:
1) skin tone burnt out when flash overexposed abit..(film still nice)
2) hair will show a dotted look due to pixels..(film nice)
3)subject sometimes look like cut and pasted on paper..
4)outline of close up face not smooth..
5)hair lose all details when printed,can only see one black patch..

Anyone contesting these few problems ??
 

#2
Sometimes, it's more of a problem with the lab and the operator rather than with digital per-se. And of coz, it also depends on several other things, the camera, the lens, the compression used, etc. I shoot digital and film, and never quite came across the things you mentioned.

Do note that 99% of the labs now are digital. Even if you ask a lab to print negatives, the negative is first scanned (Fuji usually does it at ~1800x1200 for 4R) then printed after optional colour correction.

Regards
CK
 

kex

Senior Member
Oct 16, 2002
2,078
0
36
beebox
www.beebox.com.sg
#3
there are still alot of labs using optical machines ard,definitely not just 1%.
i'm comparing film results from optcial labs and digital prints from digital labs..
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#4
kex said:
1) skin tone burnt out when flash overexposed abit..(film still nice)
Easy solution, don't overexpose. I think I tend to agree with this *if* it happens, because digital doesn't handle overexposure as well as negs do. Mind you, you'd probably experience the same thing if you shot slides, which have similar exposure latitudes.

2) hair will show a dotted look due to pixels..(film nice)

Not sure if you're referring to pixellation from diagonals? These days AA filters do a good job of resolving this issue. Alternatively, you're not shooting with enough resolution.

3)subject sometimes look like cut and pasted on paper..

See above regarding highlights. If you expose properly, I've certainly never faced this problem before.

4)outline of close up face not smooth..

Not quite sure what you mean? Do you mean the skin tone is not good, skin texture not good? If you literally mean outline, and are referring to the curve, see above about AA filters and sufficient resolution.

5)hair lose all details when printed,can only see one black patch..

Certainly not. This is an issue of the printing. Potentially cheap digital cameras have limited dynamic range, but I've never had a problem retaining hair detail in any of my digital shots, and if you've got detail in the original file, there's no reason why it doesn't come out in print except through operator error.

Anyone contesting these few problems ??

Not so much contesting. Just suggesting that the technique needs to be up to scratch. Like you expose differently for slides as you do for negs, you need to get to grips with digital. Not just in terms of exposure either, but to understand the medium. Properly harnessed, digital is every bit as good as 35mm film. And in some cases significantly better.
 

#5
kex said:
there are still alot of labs using optical machines ard,definitely not just 1%.
i'm comparing film results from optcial labs and digital prints from digital labs..
Well, the only non-digital ones are probably those in neighbourhoods, etc. All the better labs that I know of, including "chain-store" labs are already using digital machines. And from my experience, these digital prints look a lot better if you use the right lab.

Regards
CK
 

kex

Senior Member
Oct 16, 2002
2,078
0
36
beebox
www.beebox.com.sg
#6
u never been around much in that case,there is one in peoples park,one in lavender,one in shaw centre and many more..
 

jesser

New Member
Dec 28, 2002
516
0
0
Serangoon
www.jesserswork.com.sg
#7
kex said:
there are still alot of labs using optical machines ard,definitely not just 1%.
i'm comparing film results from optcial labs and digital prints from digital labs..
well, those optical labs which i used to get my films developed and printed are still around.....1 in Jurong, 1 in Queensway, 1 in A.M.K. and 1 in Seng Kang. still doing quite well so at the meantime they told me they will not upgrade their printing machine to digital. Reason is they upgrade their machine, they have to pay more every month for it and normally only a small amount of digital camera user will get their image printed out.....most of them prefer to store in their PC/CD-rom...etc. not worth the upgrade. BTW i already heard most of the upgraders had their bussiness close-down. :(
 

rncw

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2002
1,928
0
0
Singapore / Japan / China
#8
ckiang said:
Sometimes, it's more of a problem with the lab and the operator rather than with digital per-se. And of coz, it also depends on several other things, the camera, the lens, the compression used, etc. I shoot digital and film, and never quite came across the things you mentioned.

Do note that 99% of the labs now are digital. Even if you ask a lab to print negatives, the negative is first scanned (Fuji usually does it at ~1800x1200 for 4R) then printed after optional colour correction.

Regards
CK

precisely....one lab in clifford centre prints anything digitally...
their prints from film is the worst i've ever seen....so pixelated it looked like those taken with handphone camera....
 

mpenza

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
12,938
0
0
Singapore
www.instagram.com
#9
maybe you let us know what digital cameras you have tried? perhaps, you're using them in a wrong way or the digital cameras are simply bad.

I do get excellent prints from my digicams, much better in fact than what I get from film P&S.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom