Life's not fair comparison. Foveon v. Film

Your life is going to be moving very slowly if you require valid scientific tests for everything!

Using my eyes, the tools I usually use for evaluating photography, I prefer the Costco scan, myself. The Foveon looks artificial and strident.
 
I tend to agree with Dan, should really be titled "Foveon vs Costco scan".
 
The film shot very closely matches the real flowers at our farm. The Foveon seems to have captured an entirely new hibiscus variety not known to date. I could use either depending on the purpose. However, I could not use the Foveon for documentation, but maybe for artsy or gaudy purposes.

On another note, it's still more fun to use the Leica M6ttl than the DP2X. I'd add that I always have to be on guard about the foveon - perhaps digital captures in general - to avoid washing out highlights. Maybe it's possible to do some post processing or plastic surgery on the foveon capture but I really don't feel I'd like to spend time doing that.
 
I'm going to have to see the flower in person. Please ship me a living sample, then I can tell you my conclusion.
 
Happy, you'd be welcome to come visit our farm in Hawaii to see and take photos of the flowers and kava plants. We have no license to ship living plant/animal materials. There's also a lot of botannical gardens dedicated to hibiscus (Kapiolani area) and plumeria (Koko Crater) that photogs can be seen snapping happily away.

Btw, I viewed these results on an iPad2, Macbook Pro and some generic PCs. Still the film version looks closer to the original flower. It would be interesting to note if somehow a standard color ID(s) and/or contrast setting could be assigned to what I see on the screen so that any other viewer would be assured of seeing the same.
 
yee said:
It would be interesting to note if somehow a standard color ID(s) and/or contrast setting could be assigned to what I see on the screen so that any other viewer would be assured of seeing the same.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what a color profile does and why they should be included within every image. The problem though, is that even if you've got your cameras and monitor completely calibrated for accurate color, there's no guarantee that the person on the other end does and so all you can really do is go by good faith that what they're seeing is reasonably accurate.

As long as you're keeping your end of the bargain though, no point in worrying too much about what others do.
 
Funny, I stopped using film almost entirely when I got my DP1. I found the images much more film-like than anything that was coming from my Canon compacts or DSLR. Even now I hardly shoot film and prefer to shoot Sigma instead.
 
pvdhaar said:
If that were really true, then why are so many digital shooters so obsessed with emulating the look of film?
Click to expand...
Because of the aura of culture that surrounds the historic limitations of the medium. Even the M8 has 'sepia' built in.
Not to be caught out emulating, I shoot B&W on large format, defects and all, and set up with Leicaroids. Most of the time the Leicaroids look better.
"l meglio è nemico del bene" - as they say over here.
 
I am very happy with the Foveon sensor even though I only shoot film. If they put the foveon sensor in the M9 I will never look back (except B&W).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom