Billboards, banners and other big outdoor advertising is converted
to big dots through a Raster Image Processor. As long as the
original image is sharp and well exposed, it could very reasonably
be shot on a 6MP camera. I have had a museum use 6MP images of mine
for two banners hanging 2 stories high (about 30 feet) by about 6 ft
wide. So it was a strip down the middle of a 6 MP frame..... I'd
guess about 600 by 3000 pixels... what's that.... 1.8 MP?
I had told them it couldn't be done but I was wrong. It looked great
from the road.
Herschel
On 9/23/11 9:13 AM, mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Oh and the billboards, you probably could do a billboard
just fine with a 10D. Lots of 35mm frames have become
billboards. When you view something from a half a mile away,
whats required is just not as important as if you put it under
glass on display from a spot where people can get within
inches of it.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Everybody Is A Photographer
From: Russ < rebphoto@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, September 22, 2011 12:11 pm
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals -
Students
< photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
My point is that not EVERYONE needs to
upgrade every year or so...
My work as a Theatrical Photographer does not require me
to print photos the size of a Bill Board............
I just get irritated when it is thought that the only
way to produce QUALITY results is if you buy the
newest and most expensive equipment!
On 9/22/2011 12:55 PM, mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:
That can work with a non pro, but if you do that
you are making compromises. Pros to compete with
other pros usually have to be working with something
close to top of the line. Yet as technology marches
on computers quit and the new ones won't run the old
software. The new bodies have features that DO
improve your work and improvements in the chip do
improve the quality of the files. Better resolution,
bigger file size ect but all other things being equal,
you work suffers if you don't upgrade. Maybe your
type of work doesn't make those advances important,
but that makes it a limitation now not a choice. At
8x10 a 10d did ok, but go bigger and you were going to
run into limitations. Unless you take enough that you
can throw away a body in 2 years, for most pros its
not cheaper
-------- Original Message
--------
Subject: Re: Everybody Is A Photographer
From: Russ < rebphoto@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, September 22, 2011 11:17 am
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals
- Students
< photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Gang..............
Now here is something I don't
understand.................
Why is it when people talk about the "cons" of
digital
they always mention that you have to up grade
every
two years?
I used a Canon 10d for long time and since I was
getting
great results with it I never saw the need to up
grade.
At one point I got a large payment on a job and
since I saw
the need for a second body I bought a 30d, this
was when the
50d was in production. I didn't see the need to
spend a fortune
on the newest technology when I didn't need it.
After my camera equipment was recently stolen,
I bought a Nikon D90 .............not the most
recent technology!
If I am getting great results with the equipment I
currently have.....
Isn't buying new stuff every year or so more like
"Keeping up with the Jones'"
Than actually needing or requiring to have a new
camera?
Russ R.E. Baker Photography
www.rebphoto.smugmug.com
Feed a Cat...
Starve a Fever.....
--
Russ
R.E. Baker Photography
www.rebphoto.smugmug.com
Feed a Cat...
Starve a Fever.....
|
