Off topic, but... You mean most magazine pictures are not digital? Like national Geographic, People Magazine, advertisements in them, etc. Not model rr magazines.
New generation digitals can take photos that (when) published properly can rival and exceed "film" photos. Harold
The big circulation mags are not yet digitally printed. They use all the digital technology, up to the last stage--but they are still printed on "analog" presses. At least that's my latest knowledge of the state of the art. If Nat. Geo (circ. 25M) is printed on a digital press, I'll be amazed. chessie is 99.999% correct, when you are printing digital to digital. In that case, I'll agree with can "exceed." But, properly scanned for a high-qualiy press, transparencies still hold a slight edge. The edge is declining daily, in part because the real artists in this process are dying off. The grain and dynamic range of film still exceeds what a digital camera can capture--but thanslating those advantages is becoming a lost art. I think that soon the issue will be moot--we just won't be able to detect differences, no matter how expert we are.
