Re: Pop Photo Resolution Lines Per ? MATH

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Yeah, I'm sure we all pricked up on that and smirked.

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Roger Eichhorn <eichhorn@xxxxxx> wrote:
Okay, someone is going to point out that the reciprocal of 91.44 is 0.01094 (to five significant figures), not 0.1094 as I wrote.  I might as well do it myself.  My bad!

Roger


On 14 May 2008, at 5:14 PM, Roger Eichhorn wrote:

It's handy to regard unit conversions as though the units were algebraic symbols.  They can then be cancelled.  For example  2.54 cm/in X 12 in/ft = 30.48 cm/ft.  Inch is in the denominator of the first and in the numerator of the second.  The two cancel.  Take the last result and multiply by 3 ft/yd and you get 91.44 cm/yd as ft cancels.  Take he reciprocal of this last result and you  get 0.1094 yd/cm.  It avoids a lot of errors.

Roger

On 14 May 2008, at 4:11 PM, PhotoRoy6@xxxxxxx wrote:


So Jim, Michael is right
( Further, your math is wrong. 2100/25.4 = 82 lines, which translates into
41 lp/mm. Keep in mind that these tests are at full contrast (i.e. Black lines
on white background) so comparison to normal 50% MTF is difficult.
)
which makes digital APS-C no where near to 35mm film in terms of  resolution.
Thanks,
Roy



In a message dated 5/14/2008 8:48:08 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jimth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

Your understanding of conversions between metric and  imperial measurements
is decidedly limited.









**************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family
favorites at AOL Food.
(http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)





--
Alex Georgiadis

[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux