|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Even assuming you are correct, and I don't necessarily think you are, BTW, there is a difference between the rendition a 8000 dpi a CCD might offer (with its inherent averaging of film grain data due to the limitations of using a defined sensor size and placement) and the information provided by film grain (or dye clouds) which have random sizes, and position, and which may overlap in all sorts of random manners. Art Paul D. DeRocco wrote: > Even with Kodachrome 25, a tripod, and a fixed focal length lens, I don't > believe there's ever 8000dpi worth of actual picture information on a piece > of film. > > -- > > Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco > Paul mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org > > >>From: Phil.Lippincott >> >> If when using the 8000 dpi drum scan of a 35mm I can get a >>flawless perfect >>90 Mp scan how can you say that a 16Mp camera compares. Film is >>is still King >>and the drum scanner simply lets the best of the film meet the best of the >>digital. >> > - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.