This is something that I seem to miss: I know that a print needs 350dpi ( 7lpmm, and a single line has to contain at least two pixels across: black and white) to be critically sharp. OTOH 6 mp spread over 11x14 surface would yield circa 200 dpi -> 4lpmm. Which is slightly more than the half of the needed information. I can definitely see more than 4lpmm. Therefore there seem two be these possible explanations: -- those who claim that "there would be NO reason to consider film" have poor sight -- ... or they look at the print from too far away -- or they take interpolation for true resolution. In fact, I bet one can make a truly terrific 20x30 print of "Black Square" with 1 mp camera :)
Mishka ----- Original Message ----- From: "Collin Brendemuehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:11 PM Subject: 6mp Digital > Went into Cord @ lunch today. Saw a 20x30 color print > (real, not inkjet) made from a 6mp CCD digital. > > In a word: Nice. > > Very, very few edge artifacts from being digital. > The color depth just isn't quite as good as film, > but if done @ 11x14, there would be NO reason to > consider film. > > And I prefer film because of the latitude advantages. > Yet, in a controlled lighting situation, the good > stuff is very, very nice. > > It was printed by a piece of Italian hardware in the lab. > Never got the name. Anyway, that's what Cord is doing. > Pro digital printing. > > Collin > > >
