Mark -

I've done similar tests and without a doubt a MF scan will beat a 6 mp 
exposure in terms of resolution, even on a cheap scanner.

But I'm not sure what the up sampling using nearest neighbor was all 
about.  But then - I'm not sure what 'pixel peeper' means.  (I used to 
read about 'Tyros' and never knew what that meant either, but I seem to 
have outlasted the term with no ill effect from my ignorance.)

You got it right, I'm just confused about some the steps you took there...

- MCC

Mark Erickson wrote:
> I pulled the original images out of my archives, did a little prep work, and
> put the results up for review.  Here is a summary of what I did and what I
> got.
> 
> 1) Scanned medium format workflow
>    -->Rolleiflex 3.5E (6x6 medium format)
>       -->Kodak 400 T400CN
>          -->Epson 4870 (resolution set to 2400 dpi) :5280 x 5279 image
>             --> resize down to 660 x 660 for web
> 
>             http://www.westerickson.net/mark/misc/rolleilibrary.jpg
> 
>             --> crop at original resolution, then upsize 2x using "nearest
> neighbor"
> 
>             http://www.westerickson.net/mark/misc/rolleilibrary200.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 2) Web Gallery:  http://www.westerickson/brickwork/
>    -->Pentax *ist-Ds + 31mm F1.8 Ltd (raw)
>       --> bring into photoshop with Adobe Camera Raw: 3008 x 2008 image
>             --> resize down to 1049 x 700 for web
> 
>             http://www.westerickson.net/mark/misc/dslibrary.jpg
> 
>             --> crop at original resolution, then upsize 4x using "nearest
> neighbor"
> 
>             http://www.westerickson.net/mark/misc/dslibrary400.jpg
> 
> 
> I upsized in Photoshop CS2 using the 'nearest neighbor' algorithm to
> simulate what happens when most image editing software 'pixel peeps' at more
> than 100% size.  Note that the images were taken on different days under
> different lighting conditions (overcast vs open shade), so the contrast is a
> little bit different.  It's not a perfect controlled test, but I do think
> that it shows that a 50 year old camera and a $400 scanner can provide more
> resolution than a 6 megapixel DSLR and a really good lens.
> 
> Comments?  Questions?
> 
> 


-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, Michigan
www.markcassino.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Reply via email to