Bill, >From his previous posts, I get the feeling that he is a strong film advocate who is trying to prove that digital (DSLR -35mm) isn't good enough yet. Seems that I remember that he doesn't have a DSLR yet and is going through the math calisthenics like many others.
I can say, that I am having better luck blowing up *istD shots of portraits, families and weddings than I ever had shooting 35mm with equivalent best glass from Pentax. My clients are plenty happy with the last eleven 20X30's that I have delivered. Bruce Wednesday, November 17, 2004, 7:08:27 PM, you wrote: WR> ----- Original Message ----- WR> From: "Paul Stenquist" WR> Subject: Re: 20x30" from 6MP? >> How large was the file you used? it should have been interpolated >> to 72 megabytes in the RAW converter. Then you should probably have >> upsized it to 20x30 at 360 dpi. WR> Paul, he took the center portion of the image and scrutinized it, WR> probably at a normal distance for an 8x10 (less than arms length). WR> I doubt very much if the istD images would stand that sort of WR> scrutiny, no matter how they were processed. WR> OTOH, I know that 35mm film wouldn't stand it either, so I'm not WR> quite certain what he is saying. WR> William Robb
