In regard to stock, the stock houses with which I am familiar want 50 megabyte files � max. At that size I don't think there's enough difference between MF and even 6 megapixel digital to warrant the large neg.
> William Robb write: > "...[it] seems to becoming an accepted medium in advertising and stock > photography, although I wonder how, when the quality doesn't come up > to medium format film." > > I have recently become vary aware of a trend towards poor quality pictures > in magazines. Images of a quality that until a few years ago would never > have made it in. this is both in the magazine content and adverts. there is > often noise, artifacts and saw-toothed lines, often very pronounced from an > over-enlarged digital file. It just seems like they don't care so much any > more. > > Mick > > > > > >
