Re: filmscanners: Re: Any real 4000x6000 camera back???

[SKID Photography <skid@bway.net>]

Roger Smith wrote:

> At 10:29 AM +1030 11/23/01, Mark T. wrote:
> >I understand your concerns and explanation of sensor operation, but
> >if the DCS Pro really only gives a 'true' 4Mp, surely the ouput will
> >give the game away - no-one in their right mind would pay that much
> >for it.  I must be missing something obvious..  (It's Friday, so my
> >brain may be out of gear..)
>
> At 7:59 PM -0500 11/22/01, SKID Photography wrote:
> >I don't think you're missing anything.  It's why all these cameras
> >do well with broad color objects (like
> >cars) and don't do well with finely detailed subjects, like distance
> >landscapes in winter with lots of tree
> >branches.
> >
> >It's a matter of interpolation...broad areas are easier to
> >interpolate more accurately than areas of tiny
> >detail.
>
>         The Fall 2001 issue of Kodak's Professional Imaging News has
> a full-bleed photo (8.75 x 11.75 inch) taken with the DCS ProBack on
> a Hasselblad. At first glance the sharpness and detail of the model's
> face and hair are stunning. If others have acccess to that magazine,
> it would be interesting to hear their reactions.
>
> Regards,
> Roger Smith

But that is not a very big image...What's your point?  *And* it's in a 
magazine....4 color magazine
reproduction does not push the envelope very much, especially if the image is 
not cropped.

I'm not saying that these backs don't take good images, and I'm not saying that 
they can't be used in
commercial work.  What I am saying is that if these cameras were really as they 
claimed (pixel counts) they
would produce far superior and detailed imagery than they currently do...And 
this is also true of the 1.4
'megapixel' cameras as well.

It's just the 'big lie' that gets to me.

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC