Rebekah wrote: > wait, if you could decrease the distance between the sensor and the > film, would the average be more accurate? What if pixels were a > different shape, like hexagons? Would it look better?
It's not about digital versus analog, aliasing happens in both cases. It's just that aliasing errors in the analog world are more randomly distributed and harder to detect for the human visual system. The only way to eliminate it in the general case is to have an infinite number of inifintely small sensors. In the specific case of scanners and film, just avoid the bad combinations. Different film emulsions have different characteristics for the size and shape and distribution of "grains" just as different scanners have different sensor characteristics. Some combinations lead to strong GA, many don't. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
