FotoDave@aol.com
Wed, 13 Jan 1999 03:13:15 -0500 (EST)
In a message dated 99-01-12 23:47:24 EST, glaughter@earthlink.net writes:
> Has this now become a list for splitting hairs, proving micro points and
> beating dead horses? Is this now a list with an attitude?
>
Gene,
You didn't specifically mention any thread, discussion, or person, but from
the latest traffic I think it is the "continous tone" thread that is bothering
you and/or others. Since I was quite involved in the discussion, I think I
should explain a little.
I have been interested in the continous-tone versus digital negatives for a
long time. About half a year ago there was a brief discussion, but we never
got into details. This time we did get into some very technical stuffs, which
interested me a lot but maybe are irrelavant to others; but I wasn't trying to
argue just for the argument sake.
There seems to be some important differences between contone and digital
negatives which will affect how we control the print and how the print will
look (I used "seems" because I cannot be 100% sure, and that's why I want to
ask questions). Perhaps others are not doing digital so it won't interest them
at all.
The problem is not the discussion itself. If people are not interested in the
discussion, or if there isn't enough people with the same background to
participate in the discussion, the thread will die away itself. The problem is
some seem to get upset when a view is taken but a different view is pointed
out.
Maybe you (and hopefully others) will understand me when I post my questions
about contone vs. digital.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Nov 06 1999 - 10:06:41