Michael;
Could you clarify the term "properly scanned" in this context? Dave
mentioned scanning at 200 ppi.
Thanks,
James
At 06:30 PM 12/6/2008 +0000, you wrote:
Deaer Dave,
You can calculate all you want and even pixel peep, but in the end
most people will "see what they want to see and hear what they want
to hear" or in other words: people's opinions are highly subjective
in spite of promoting various scientific "proofs" to support their
subconscious bias. Or to put it more simple: take every bit advise
with a grain of salt.
For the comparison you suggest, the anecdotal evidence is
overwhelming: a 4x5 neg, properly exposed and properly scanned and
properly printed will produce excellent 30"x40" prints.
The same cannot be said of a 12mp digital camera.
So while I might agree that a 12mp camera and a 4x5 can produce
comparable-looking 16x20's, when it comes to much bigger prints,
film still has quite an edge.
Michael
P.S. Nyquist calculation suggests that the maximum system detail
extracted from a full-frame sensor can be no more than 16Mp -- so
what does that tell you about the new 24mp cameras being promoted today?
James Schenken
