From: "gary" <lists@lazygranch.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suspect the "generations" effect is why it takes less resolution in a
DSLR to be equivalent to film. That is, the EOS-1Ds Mark II, at
16Mpixels, is considered to be as good as scanned film, which generally
exceeds 30MPixels.
I saw a website that compared drum to a dedicated film scanner, with the
claim that you really don't get the full stated resolution with a film
scanner.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I've never seen a drum vs. 4000 ppi Nikon comparison that I thought showed a
ntoiceable or significant advantage to the drum scan. The differences are
very much on the order of counting angels on heads of pins.
And the 12.7 and 16MP Canons look a lot more like 645 than 35mm, in terms of
print quality at 12x18. (This guy is printing a lot bigger than I would, and
thus is agonizing over really minor differences.)
David J. Littleboy
davidjl@gol.com
Tokyo, Japan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
