I took the first version to Photoshop and found big pixels. The latest vesion I believe is appr. 4.5 MP. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 19. april 2004 07:59 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: RE: Name that capture? Not high resolution? take a look at this version: http://jcoconnell.com/temp/macro01m.jpg I'll reveal the equipment later. JCO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 1:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Name that capture? Very life like quaility. I'd say the lack of grain indicates its's a digital recording. Not very high resulution, judging from blowing it up. All the best Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 19. april 2004 04:28 Til: pentax discuss Emne: Name that capture? Not a pretty shot but the image quality is up there: http://jcoconnell.com/temp/macro01s.jpg Film or digital?, lens? Cost of equipment? Anyone care to guess? JCO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
