<<I don't think you can say that film is not inherently resolution limited. Since the sensitive material in traditional films is size limited by silver halide crystals, there is, ultimately, a clear physical limit to what can be resolved. >> Maybe I wasn't clear ;o) By "inherently" I meant that fine detail falling on film will produce responses that are not restricted in a predictable way by the orgainisation of grains - simply because they are random. Random arrangements are non-isotropic. That certainly isn't the case for digital where, for instance, one manufacturer turned the sensor 45degrees to be able to claim horizontal and vertical resolutions were better (neglecting to metion diagonal ones were inferior). If you took a hypothetical grid of perfect pixels - aliasing artifacts are an inevitable possibility, even with an "anti-aliasing" filter in place. <<<Nevertheless in everyday situations the question is effectively academic. >>> Mmm ... in everyday situations the "great unwashed" by and large don't notice focus, composition, exposure ... as long as they know that blob is "thier" little Johnny they will email it to all thier friends anyway ;o) <<If a picture looks sharp and detailed, then to the vast majority of viewers it is sharp and detailed. I see no value in the argument, other than at an academic level of saying "ah but in reality..." if you can't observe it.>> It may be academic to you, as indeed the majority of the population that use cameras really have no appreciation of what photographers might think makes a good photo. It's far from academic - in scientific/astronomical imaging though I would accept that for pure pictorialism it would be. Take any digital image. Sharpen (/unsharp mask) it. The image contains less information. Simply fact - it's a one-way process <<With regard to your description of "patently obvious" it still needs someone to realise it and put it into practice! >> Patently obvious to me then, thinking about what is involved. It's all down to the random samples (random in size, shape and position). Patterns of light leave a trace trace on film without the imposition of an ordered array of samples. Take a series of frames of a static scene with a digital sensor and the same from film. With digital the best you can achieve is to reduce noise but ATEOTD the result will be limited by the pixel spacing. -- Whatever you Wanadoo: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/ This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at: http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm
