On 23 Apr 2004 at 23:17, Julian Loke wrote:
> > ... I'm really curious as to how a digital image projected onto a
> > screen with a media projector, powerpoint or whatever, compares with
> > a chemical slide projected with a traditional projector...
>
> Hi Ken,
>
> An XGA projector has a resolution of 1024x768 pixels. That's only 0.7
> megapixels.
>
> What else do you need to know?
>From a beamer-report in the German C't magazine I recall that to get
equal visual results, you don't need the number of pixels that a drum-
scan would generate from an analog image, as a tech-maximum, looking
at the source....at least not with average household distances &
screen sizes, looking at the resulting image.
And at a certain point in time/tech/price, convenience probably takes
over.
(not to mention that at some point in time, people might not *have*
an analog source anymore....or before that, not willing to transfer a
digi-only picture to slide (unless that too gets cheap, for home-
use....;))
All that based on 35mm slides that is....medium format, or even the
rare species of large format[*] projectors, might never see a digital
equivalent....:))
(35mm digicams would never get such high pixel-numbers in future
either....no market, no lenses to deliver that quality, and huge file-
sizes (but that should be just a matter of time, tech-wise).
[*] preferably fed with a 5x12cm frame from a swing-lens panorama-
camera, the highest optical performance you can get on such a format
(much smaller image circle than a full 4x5" format would require,
hence inherently easier to design & sharper).
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
