Reevaluating digital vs. conventional photographic cameras for research

Response to Hirsch (2001)

“…Another thing to keep in mind is that one of the archive formats possible for images obtained digitally is analog film! We do not agree that changes in lighting like those suggested by Hirsch (2001) can easily allow high f-stops with conventional film cameras. This is not because conventional film cameras are technically incapable of smaller apertures; rather, it is the difficulty involved in metering magnified shots of three-dimensional objects that require high contrast that restricts the use of analog film for imaging bone or tooth modification.…”

“…The response to our paper by Hirsch (2001) addresses some of the specific procedures we outline and also the more general debate over analog and digital photography. We address the specifics first.…”

“…As Hirsch (2001) suggests in the response, the techniques in our paper can be accomplished with an analog film camera if appropriate lighting and exposure are used, but the difference between technically possible and universally practical is big here. Light metering and effective bracketing become very difficult when shooting small objects while a camera's iris is very tight.…”

Anatomical informatics: Millennial perspectives on a newer frontier

“…Although traditional photography and its elaborations remain a mainstay for macroscopic and microscopic anatomical work, digital cameras are now providing resolution and capabilities rivaling those of 35‐mm cameras (Gilbert and Richards, 2000, 2001; Hirsch, 2001).…”