Digital noise

Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 1/02/2010 3:42 PM:

For example, if you shoot a photo of a snow-covered yard (or any
monochromatic smooth surface) with both digital and film and then blow
up both pics, it might appear that the film image has more detail in
the snow.

Brett: no one in his right mind wants to see "detail" in snow!...
When are you gonna start taking *photos* instead of "statements of detail"?

Noons wrote:
Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 1/02/2010 3:42 PM:

For example, if you shoot a photo of a snow-covered yard (or any
monochromatic smooth surface) with both digital and film and then blow
up both pics, it might appear that the film image has more detail in
the snow.

Brett: no one in his right mind wants to see "detail" in snow!...
When are you gonna start taking *photos* instead of "statements of detail"?


Odd statement: Bret has posted more photos than anyone, and I sure
haven't seen anything worthwhile from your sniping self.

--
john mcwilliams

Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 3/02/2010 4:16 AM:

First off, it's "Bret."

Er.......
OK.

I remember the last time it snowed here (2003, I think) and I posted
some pics I took then comparing film to digital. A few of the film
luddites complained that the digital shots smoothed out the texture of
the snow into a white blob. So maybe that bolsters your point.

Wanna bet all of those "film luddites" weren't?

John McWilliams wrote,on my timestamp of 3/02/2010 3:00 AM:
Noons wrote:
Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 1/02/2010 3:42 PM:

For example, if you shoot a photo of a snow-covered yard (or any
monochromatic smooth surface) with both digital and film and then blow
up both pics, it might appear that the film image has more detail in
the snow.

Brett: no one in his right mind wants to see "detail" in snow!...
When are you gonna start taking *photos* instead of "statements of
detail"?


Odd statement: Bret has posted more photos than anyone, and I sure
haven't seen anything worthwhile from your sniping self.


Rest...
It's obviosuly all too much for your old mind.

Noons wrote:
John McWilliams wrote,on my timestamp of 3/02/2010 3:00 AM:
Noons wrote:
Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 1/02/2010 3:42 PM:

For example, if you shoot a photo of a snow-covered yard (or any
monochromatic smooth surface) with both digital and film and then blow
up both pics, it might appear that the film image has more detail in
the snow.

Brett: no one in his right mind wants to see "detail" in snow!...
When are you gonna start taking *photos* instead of "statements of
detail"?


Odd statement: Bret has posted more photos than anyone, and I sure
haven't seen anything worthwhile from your sniping self.


Rest...
It's obviosuly all too much for your old mind.

Almost a week and you come up with this weak response?

You've slipped to nu lo's.

John McWilliams wrote,on my timestamp of 9/02/2010 4:13 AM:

Brett: no one in his right mind wants to see "detail" in snow!...
When are you gonna start taking *photos* instead of "statements of
detail"?


Odd statement: Bret has posted more photos than anyone, and I sure
haven't seen anything worthwhile from your sniping self.


Rest...
It's obviosuly all too much for your old mind.

Almost a week and you come up with this weak response?

The truth hurts, doesn't it?


You've slipped to nu lo's.

Nevertheless, I still look down on you.