Re: Trip Report 5/23 to 5/30

Message posted by lone wolf on June 03, 2006 at 8:11:43 PST:

For many photographs, digital will be fine. Once in a while, you can benefit from the extra resolution of film. I recently shot an asset of "the company" at a nearby airport using as big of a lens that is practical (400mm). With film, I was able to get photos of the faces associated with the plane. I get images about 7500 pixels wide.

You really need a sensor as big as 35mm film to get the most out of modern optics. There is all sorts of math showing that a pixel pitch around 10um is optimal. Semiconductor yield goes down exponentially with die size, so large sensors are very expensive. Then there is the issue of the pixels being R, G, or B (excluding Foveon technology). Digital cameras have to intentionally blur the image to get a bit of sharing between pixels so that the processed image will contain RBG per pixel.

Regarding scratches on the film, a dip and dunk lab will in theory produce no scratches. Reality is another story, but film scanners with IR capability can detect dust and scratches on the film, then remove them very effectively. I use Vuescan
This program is also used to post-process images from digital cameras. The pro version has infinite upgrades.

Attached link: kaput

In Reply to: Re: Trip Report 5/23 to 5/30 posted by Andre' M. Dall'au on June 03, 2006 at 5:33:24 PST:


[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]