Any way to tell if the original photo was on film or digital?

Canoneer · Jun 18, 2014

Obviously if a print is on photopaper, that indicates there was a photo taken on film, right? But can you tell the difference between a print made from scanned film and one from an originally digital image?

Fred Berg · Jun 19, 2014

I'm not sure if I can. Sometimes I think yes, because there are tell tale signs that hint at a film or digital origin, but even then it can be tricky. I have a Canon 10D, for instance, and when I fit an adaptor to use some of my old M42 lenses, the results sometimes look very like film to me. Also, there are ways to make digital look like film these days that can be difficult to spot.

If you're thinking of buying some prints that are more expensive because they are film, you could get a third party expert opinion before committng.

Derrel · Jun 19, 2014

With a 10x loupe almost always.

e.rose · Jun 19, 2014

Canoneer said:
Obviously if a print is on photopaper, that indicates there was a photo taken on film, right?

Uhhhh... no?

Unless I've been shooting film this whole time and didn't realize it...

minicoop1985 · Jun 19, 2014

You can always ask "Was this shot on film?"

But really, Derrel can, but I can't. I can tell what's a scanned negative printed from the digital file in my own work (AKA third generation looks like ASS and they're usually square), but otherwise... nope.

Derrel · Jun 19, 2014

Amazon.com : Schneider 10x Magnifying Loupe : Photography Loupes : Camera & Photo

http://www.google.com/search?q=10x+...IDYawyASKjYDwBw&ved=0CEMQsAQ&biw=1582&bih=892

photoguy99 · Jun 19, 2014

If someone is trying to fool you and has access to a good set of tools, there's no way to be sure. They can definitely fool anyone.

If there's no attempt to fool you, then it should be reatdy to tell with a close inspection and some knowledge.

gsgary · Jun 19, 2014

Try smelling them

runnah · Jun 19, 2014

gsgary said:
Try smelling them

Funny but true.

Get a loupe, CMYK printed photos consist of dots, film paper does not.

But if you scan and then print a developed photo it will have dots.

webestang64 · Jun 19, 2014

Canoneer said:
Obviously if a print is on photopaper, that indicates there was a photo taken on film, right? But can you tell the difference between a print made from scanned film and one from an originally digital image?

Yes, I can. But I have to have the prints in my hand to view them.

KmH · Jun 19, 2014

Canoneer said:
Obviously if a print is on photopaper, that indicates there was a photo taken on film, right?

No.

Digital images, film negatives, and film slides can be printed on chromogenic photo paper (C-prints). Chromogenic color print - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canoneer · Jun 19, 2014

Thanks, everybody. I would imagine that a JPEG photo would show interpolation patterns upon magnification of the print. But when film is scanned, doesn't that happen too?

Don't guess any of a digital pic's metadata shows up in a print? (I mean, as some kind of artifact, not as an intentional label.)

timor · Jun 19, 2014

Canoneer said:
Obviously if a print is on photopaper, that indicates there was a photo taken on film, right?

Wrong.
DE VERE 504DS Digital Enlarger

vintagesnaps · Jun 19, 2014

I could tell the difference in look and feel of the paper and gloss (and as Gary said smell). But I don't know that you can tell for sure if the original source was film once it's been scanned/reprinted. Hard to tell I think without being able to see or handle the original, but I can't say I've been out doing much comparing beyond what I observe with my own.

Canoneer · Jun 19, 2014

Tell you a little of what this is about. For 3-4 years now, I've been thinking of a story where part of the detective work involves discovering that a photo was taken on film, then "laundered" by scanning and printing to hide its origin. The photo was of a night scene, taken with a noct. A cagey old police photographer deduces the image was caught on film with expensive but old equipment, and those clues are enough for a search for hobbyists who buy film and have old fancy lenses.

Now of course there's the Nikon AF 58mm 1.4, that may give similar results to the noct. Then there is the problem that software can imitate a pic taken by a noct. Think I'll have to get at this another way.