On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:05:24 -0600, Mike Johnston wrote:
[...] limits of enlargement are about 8-12x (depending no[t] so
much on the granularity of the film as upon the quality of the
enlarging lens and the technique of the printer-- [...]
So where are we when we convert the optically
Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 10:05:24 -0600, Mike Johnston wrote:
[...] limits of enlargement are about 8-12x (depending no[t] so
much on the granularity of the film as upon the quality of the
enlarging lens and the technique of the printer-- [...]
So where are
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So where are we when we convert the optically enlarge, optically
print steps of the process to digitally enlarge, digitally print?
Intuitively, it would seem that the potential for greater
magnifications would be increased.
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Doug,
Why do you say intuitively? I don't see it that way. It would
still seem to come down to quality of equipment. Are you assuming
that digital scanners are better resolution that the optical systems?
Please explain.
Thanks,
Bruce
Sunday, December 15, 2002, 8:40:23 AM, you wrote:
DF
On 15 Dec 2002 at 15:04, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Doug,
Why do you say intuitively? I don't see it that way. It would
still seem to come down to quality of equipment. Are you assuming
that digital scanners are better resolution that the optical systems?
No Doug, but..
Once an image is in
5 matches
Mail list logo
