As always Mark, you make a great point.
On Jan 21, 2007, at 5:47 PM, Mark Cassino wrote: > I spent a lot of time trying to sort out the whole film vs digital > thing. A lot of the things I worked through are on my blog, but this > link sums up where I finally wound up: > > http://www.markcassino.com/b2evolution/index.php? > title=stuff_per_pixel&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1 > > Medium format and certainly large format still excel at capturing > scenes > that require very high resolution, and still do a better job than > digital. But, most folks never shoot stuff that really calls for high > resolution, so this is a moot point to them. I don't think a group > portrait is a particularly high resolution challenge, unless you > need to > see individual eyelashes. > > As a practical example - I'm working today on an entry for an art > show, > hosted by the local at museum. I've been struggling all day to get a > decent 12x18 print of this shot: > > http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/stream/061201/_IGP0058.htm > > It was taken with the K10D. There is just gobs of data in that image - > branches upon branches upon branches. I've tried various raw > interpreters but at the end of the day - the data just was not > captured > on the sensor, so I get jaggies and a loss of detail in the most > intricate parts of the image. > > On the flip side, the other image that I plan on submitting is a 28 > x 23 > inch print of this framed out generously and sitting in my dining > room: > > http://www.markcassino.com/galleries/asga/asga00.htm > > That was taken with a 6x7, 55mm f4, and scanned on a lowly Epson 3200. > It was shot on Classic Pan 200. But the detail in the enlargement is > outstanding. Here's an actual pixels sample: > > http://www.markcassino.com/b2evolution/media/67_504_detail.jpg > > The detail in the enlargement far exceeds the detail in the shot taken > with the K10D. I mean - comparing a 12x18 to a 28x23, the latter has > more detail. There is no way I could print the K10D shot at that size > and get anything but an artifaced mess. > > On the flip side - I would never try to take snow crystal shots > with the > 6x7 - trying to enlarge a 5mm snow crystal up to 6 cm would be almost > impossible - just enlarging them to fit an APS sensor will capture all > of the availble detail. And I have some excellent 28x28 inch > enlargements of snow crystals shot with the *ist-D. > > So - it all boils down to what tool is right for the job. The folks at > luminous landscape defined "the job" a certain way, and came up with > their results. It's useful as a benchmark of where digital is in > relation to film - I've been surprised at how much more detail the K0D > can capture vs the *ist-D. But it's also a bit of a tautology in > that if > you know the state of current photographic tools, what is right for > the > job is obvious. > > - MCC > > Jens Bladt wrote: >> To me this question is not a religion - just at matter of choosing >> the right >> gear for the job. >> Well, I know Luminous Landscape says a Canon 1Ds does better than >> a scan >> from a Pentax 6x7. >> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml >> >> But paper is patient. So are HTML-files. >> But what can we do, really? >> >> Have any of you guys done group-portraits with a digital camera - >> APS or >> Full Frame? >> If you have such group portraits, showing 20-30 people, I'd love >> to see one >> face croped out of it. >> A crop showing 5-10% of the total frame area. >> Just to see if you can do this better than me. >> >> So, for staters I made a small comparison here: >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594491741789/ >> >> Comments are most welcome >> Regards >> Jens Bladt >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.3/642 - Release Date: >> 01/20/2007 >> 22:31 >> >> > > > -- > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Mark Cassino Photography > Kalamazoo, Michigan > www.markcassino.com > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > -- > 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
