About the width of a very small bee's d**k...

;-)

Cheers

Shaun

Cotty wrote:
I wondered there, why nobody made a simple calculation like this:

(Assuming, that there are some similar effects to the Nyquist-theoreme


[snip}


(Pixels in modern sensors for digital imaging in microscopy are at 3,45
�m in the Leica DC300 for example, so we're not that far away from it!)

On a 24x36mm array these would be 22500 x 15000, or 337 Million.
Roughly 900 Million for 645 MF, or 1,5 GPix for the 6*7 medium format.


Damn and blast it! I was calculating 3.46 �m all this time. What an arse I am. I need my head examining. Please.

Sober, (honest)

Cotty

PS - what in Bealzebub's name is a �m ? Is that like 'ummm' written pretentiously or what? Sheesh.

____________________________________
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/
____________________________________
Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at
http://www.macads.co.uk/
____________________________________

.



--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Shaun Canning                                                           
Cultural Heritage Services                                              
High Street, Broadford,
Victoria, 3658.

www.heritageservices.com.au/

Phone: 0414-967644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++





Reply via email to