Backup digital on film?

[burtharrris]

I was looking at this article about how a magazine won't use digital files because the resolution isn't high enough:

http://www.arizonahighways.com/page.cfm?name=Photo_Talk803&page=2

The real odd thing is that they tell people to back up their digital files on film, "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Remember always to back up your digital photographs on film." I didn't know that was possible. Plus it says if you back up your 11mp file on film, you can scan it later on 20mp???

Sounds like a load of garbage to me. Is he saying take a film photo of everything you take digitally, or can you put a digital file onto film?
[/FONT]

 

[fmw]

Sounds like a load of garbage to me too. Backing them up to an external hard drive would be a lot cheaper and faster.

Understand that a magazine like Arizona Highways prints images using half tones. A half tone is bunch of dots in a matrix just like a digital print or an image from a digital sensor. To say that a DSLR can produce higher resolution than a magazine half tone needs would be an understatement. It's probably time for Arizone Highways to get up to date and buy a computer.

 

[Alex_B]

this article is really incredible.

backing up on film to then scanning at higher res is just .. wow,... how can people believe in this ...

 

[burtharrris]

It magically creates pixels!!

I think they're just a bunch of grouchy artists who refuse to progress with their art.

 

[dewey]

LMAO... good read.

I squeeze my memory cards REALLY hard and drink the juice that comes out of them... hi res files then magically come out of my...

 

[Alex_B]

don't laugh, but there are actually lots of people who think that the quality of the pictures depends on the quality of the memory card ... and there is people who only "expose" their memory cards once each ... and then archive them.

so lots of strange things out there ... but this person is sort of a professional... that is the thing that scares me.

 

[New Hampshire]

I have a friend who is a professional Landscape Photographer. He sells many images to all kinds of magazines. His bread and butter had been his Medium Format work, but he told me lately that Magazine editors only want digital simply for the ease of use. He says he basically was "forced" into going digital (at heart he still remains a film man.)

Brian

 

[droyz2000]

It could be one of those things where the photographer makes crazy statements just so people talk about him. We would not be talking about this article if he would have said how convenient and easy digital has made magazine production. The other thing is that I have never heard of Arizona Highways magazine but now I have because of a few crazy comments. This could just be a marketing ploy.

 

[xfloggingkylex]

don't laugh, but there are actually lots of people who think that the quality of the pictures depends on the quality of the memory card ... and there is people who only "expose" their memory cards once each ... and then archive them.

so lots of strange things out there ... but this person is sort of a professional... that is the thing that scares me.

you mean you can use a memory card more than once???? This is going to save me so much money :lmao:

and Droyz2000, if he had said something controversial that would work, but to say something so idiotic doesn't get the kind of publicity he wants, beacuse no everyone thinks he is completely clueless about his job.

 

[Garbz]

It is perfectly understandable that film and by that I mean medium or large format produces better results than many high end digital cameras (ok Hasselblad H3D owners you stay out of this one), I mean even the Canon 1D MkII is as far as I have researched pretty equivalent to a 35mm slide.

But that is beside the point. My sister's $200 digicam would take a picture with enough quality to be reproduced on a magazine!