Sorry but forgot something there, with a 100Mpixel image the magnification in a given print is about 1/4 as much as it would be from a 6.7 Mixel image so the grain if any is about 1/16 the size! That's the whole point of LF, less enlargement means sharper image and way less grain often to the point of none visible until you start to make VERY large prints. The other thing is if you scan LF at lower resolution ( I often use 1200ppi for 5x7 and 5x9 negs), there is NO GRAIN in the print because the scanner cant resolve it at those scanning resolutions. But since the negs are so big the files and prints are still very sharp even at 30-40 Mpixels and GRAINLESS!
JCO -----Original Message----- From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 11:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: sad stuff about stock photography and up-to-date technology 100 Mpixel from 20 square inches is the same as 6.7 Mpixel from a 35mm frame (which each work out to around 2200ppi). Just how much that shows up grain depends on the film; if you're shooting Tri-X you'll definitely see grain, while scans from Velvia will look fairly smooth. > How big is one of those pixels compared to film grain ? > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: > > > You can get over 100 Mpixel images from 4x5 film > > with inexpensive Epson 3200 scanners. > > JCO >
