----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So is the conventional teaching incorrect when it comes to direct digital
capture? Perhaps more importantly, how many >megapixels are needed for an
extremely sharp 11x17 inch print?
Howard
No, you will need ~17Mpixels to capture all detail at 300dpi, 11x17. Thats
not to say you can't make beautiful prints from a 6Mp file, but it just
won't have all the detail of a 4000dpi scan. I have in fact compared a 4000
dpi scan with a 10d file and there is no doubt that the scan holds more
detail; BUT it requires a bit of work to make it appear as 'clean' as the
10d.
If you are doing mainly portrait and some types of PJ work that does not
require minute detail, 6Mp might be 'good enough'. For the descerning
landscape and wildlife photographer that wants to eek out the last bit of
detail, film is still the way to go IMO (or if you can afford an 1ds...).
That is one of the reasons that I'm still holding on to my film camera and
have, in fact, just invested in a new Minota 5400dpi scanner. I expect a
series of 8 Mpixel cameras to appear next year - maybe that will be good
enough to switch for my purposes.
Regards
Thys
---------------------------------------------------------
Thys van der Merwe
Portfolio of African Images:
http://mysite.mweb.co.za/residents/teknovis
Cell: (+27) 83-441-3108
Tel: (+27) 35-753-3766
Fax: (+27) 35-753-4489
-----------------------------------------------------------
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
