>>3096091>Who gives a fuck about resolution>le digital has better resolution than film memecan we please stop perpetuing that awful and plain wrong myth too?
look at pic related, right is film, looks as good as it would look rendering a whole image. film is noble and beautiful, even a tiny crop of film still retains all its properties. i mean, if were to you pick a speck of gold from a gold bar, would it be a lesser sample of it? nope, it would be just the same, but a smaller sample.
now look at left, look at that literal piece of shit. looks hilariously close to a 2005 cellphone photo. digital inspected up close looks like a fucking turd, its as if the big sensor was made from a bunch of pre 2010 cellphone sensors put together. a small sample of digital always looks corrupted and raped by anti alias/averaging/noise reduction, no matter how good or state of the art is the digital camera, when closely inspected -aka printed- it just falls apart. thats why fine art still is done in film. because at any size, film still looks good.
