My first guess was a digital compact with a small sensor because of the DOF. If you have used 120 film you have used a very small aperture.
DagT > > Fra: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Dato: 2004/04/19 Mon AM 08:24:02 CEST > Til: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Emne: RE: Name that capture? > > OK, I'll throw another hint. You cant get grainless scans this > big with 35mm film in black and white, let alone color. It is not > 35mm film. > > JCO > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andre Langevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 2:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 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 > > This could be from one of your setting with an enlarging lens > (reversed?) on a 35mm film camera. One of the best way to do macro. > If this is the case, the cost of an old enlarging lens should be > under $40. > > Andre > >
