I think that the 1ds has changed a lot of things. It is fairly obvious from its reception that it at last achieves what was not possible before. Quality and portability.
I have done 1ds tests all the way to dot screened 175lpi litho proofs. My tests included enlargement up to 750mm deep. Gobsmacked is the only word I can use.
I wouldn't use the 1ds for advertising work which required something better because of the nature of the photograph; like cars in studios. Where portability is a requirement it is unlikely anyone will see a disadvantage using the 1ds in "normal" magazine repro. As far as posters are concerned, with viewing distances much greater, file size is much less important. Also long lenses give a more pleasing perspective at long viewing distances and are easier to handle on smaller cameras.
Please note that when I said 10x8 E3 I was talking about an old emulsion which was state of the art then but just wouldn't cut the mustard now. But, the same arguments were used about photographers, equipment and ego back then.
Bob Croxford
On Thursday, November 13, 2003, at 09:21 am, Bob Marchant wrote:
Hi Bob.
Are you by any chance related to the same Bob Croxford with whom I had many a debate about the quality of digital images , especially about resolution ? :-) . I think we should be told !
Seriously though.If you think that the 1ds produces better quality than
10x8 film , then imagine the quality achieved with a much larger chip
, dedicated digital lenses and selective focus ( can use wider apertures
for required depth of field and thus sharper images,true perspective
correction etc etc).
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
