View Single Post
  #14  
Old 23-02-2007, 09:57 AM
rogerg's Avatar
rogerg (Roger)
Registered User

rogerg is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 4,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwolf View Post
How easy is it to develop the film yourself and use a negative scanner to grab a very high dpi scan of the image. Given the price drop in film cameras especially the second hand bargains that are coming up this seems to make sense.
Film scanners are relatively expensive (or at least last I looked at them), but you are right that the camera's are cheap. In my 'last days of film' I was just getting them developed and scanned by the lab, I believe that was most cost effective. Probably not an option in many places now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by netwolf View Post
However one aspect of film photography is that you needed a very good mount with low PE to do the job right. With digital one can do lots of smaller exposures and add them together.
Actually, I disagree. If you are doing 5 minute exposures with digital, you probably have at least half to 2/3 of your PE cycle included in that anyway. Once you go that far, you just have to make the same corrections over and over again. I never had a problem with manually guiding film exposures up to an hour (I had failures, but it was OK). I'd argue that digital requires a higher level of precision with the small pixel size. With either you can autoguide no problem, in the same way as you would for digital for film.

Roger.
Reply With Quote