Quote:
Originally Posted by CK1
I think i over explained my opinion. just, once an image is digitized (scanned) it is a digital image. only point i was trying to make, you can't make a lost picture a perfect picture. you can make a good pictures great or even perfect. if it has some imperfections, then of course you can fix it. but that applies to digital too. just saying that if you are already digital, you can save steps.
|
Yep, precisely, I gotcha now. And with whichever format you choose to start, whether digital or film (negative or slide), it helps to start with higher grade equipment. I don't think I'd bother with digital less than 8mp (I'd rather go with 16mp, but I'd be happy with 10 or 11), and with film I don't use anything higher than 200ASA--400 has too much grain for me. I'd like to switch to digital myself, simply because it would save on lab costs, and as you said CK1, it does save steps and that means time. In the interim, getting your old family negatives, or your older work-product digitally scanned with a good, high-powered, high-resolution scanner and burned to CD does make sense to me--film can break down fairly quickly if not stored properly, and while the aluminum that makes up the CD wafer does corrode, its at a very slow rate--just saying if you have some photos/negatives that are irreplaceable, you might want to make that little investment (the place I go to can scan up to 100 negatives/slides onto a CD for under $5.00US) then stick them someplace safe (i.e., safety deposit box) so if the worst happens (i.e., fire, flood), you still have those memories.