35mmSlides Scanned V Raw Digital images.
Ive uploaded my final set of train images which date back to 1995 (with the majority between 2001-2007) All are from the Great Central. I was keen to see how scanned slides fared against my Digital RAW files…..My conclusion was that Digital cameras can give you alot more scope and the amount of post processing is greatly reduced. The amount of white balance correction and work in the curves & levels layer on photoshop was quite time consuming as well to bring images back to where they should be. But the most obvious concern for me was just how soft images were. I know scanners do scan in soft to prevent aberrations & ghosting effects, but to bring them back sharp can make the images look really nasty. Film noise even on 100 & 200 asa films was trash when compared to Digital, you can wack your D300 upto 800 asa and it still looks as good as it did at 200.
My summary for what its worth is Thank god i made the switch when i did, God knows why people still think film is better…………….Oh and did i forget to say digital photographers don’t have to wait a week to see their results….we just delete them on the lineside ready to have another shot with the corrections made in seconds to the camera!
Anyhow heres 2 images….1 Digital & 1 slide scanned in….Which ones which?
