> Hopefully someone can do some tests that show definitely whether the
> Polaroid
> is capable of 4000 dpi resolution or about 50% more resolution than the
> 2700
> dpi units.
Your own tests show a clear differential in MTF, although only a small
increase in resolution. In terms of image quality MTF is *vastly* more
important than ultimate resolution. Look it up. In fact look up the whole
matter of resolution and MTF and their relative perceptual value.
Understanding photography helps a lot here.
Your resampling down to 3000ppi shows nothing except the in/effectiveness
of resampling algorithms. But you are looking at the wrong parameter
anyway.
I am starting to feel embarassed about pointing out these basic
misunderstandings, which I am sure you will only see as personal attacks
and evidence of vested interest in rubbishing a potential competitor. This
isn't the case, it's just that you keep coming up with stuff which is
wrong. So I don't propose to comment further on any more of this nonsense.
There are plenty of people on this list who do know what they are talking
about, perhaps you will listen to them.
Regards
Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner
info & comparisons
====================================================================
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
