Matt wrote: > And the whole idea of saying "pixels" seems somehow > odd, since the discussion is about film and not > digital images and slide or print film, by their very > nature, do not have "pixels", though I understood what > you meant.
How is the discussion about film? The thread is called "Megapixels required for an 8X10 print?" That's what I was addressing, anyway. >Yes, but your inference is that the image "suffers" by >the increase. If the image or scene is "intimate", it >might, but generally such a small increase in size >does not affect the image (or grain) at all. Again, I didn't make any such inference. I make lots of 5x7 prints. I was discussing the thread title. --Mike
