Some second thoughts. The original scan would produce a 17"X25" print at 300dpi. Each of the image cuts would occupy about 1.4" X 1.1" of the total image. The thumbnails are about that size and they look almost the same. Only closer examination reveals the loss of definition. Hmmm.........
Bob Rapp ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Rapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 9:04 PM Subject: Re: Print sizes and megapixels > Based on Print sizes and Megapixels, I made a little test with my film > scanner. I scanned an image that had a huge amount of detail. First at > 5400 > dpi and then 2700 dpi. The 2700 was downsized to match a 6mp image and > then > upsized to match the original. You can see the results here: > > > http://www.users.on.net/~bobrapp/test/pictures.html > > I am still torn between a digital scanner or a Miccrotek 120tf and start > using my 67 and Horseman again. With digital, I can take heaps of pictures > and with film, I feel that I have some satisfaction. I keep negatives but > hardly any images off of the Oly (which I think is excellent). > > Cheers, > > Bob Rapp > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Rapp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> I have upsized RAW conversions from my 7 mp C7070 and they look great. >> But if the subject contains significant minute detail, I would prefer the >> scanned version. >> FWIW I use a Minolta Scan-Elite 5400 (first version) with Silverfast >> AI. >> I scan at 16-bit 5400 with the diffuser and GANE noise reduction and >> sharpen >> is CS. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
