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.
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:email@example.com
>> If when using the 8000 dpi drum scan of a 35mm I can get a
>>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
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Index of Archives]