Scanners: How many pixles
Apr 13, 2018 10:38:13 #
How many pixels are there in Kodachrome and other slide films? What about color negs and BW negs? There is a differential.
Apr 13, 2018 10:48:46 #
Well, I don't know if you would call them pixels but it would depend on the film speed. Different film speeds have different size crystals with the slower speeds having smaller and thus more.
Apr 13, 2018 10:52:12 #
Also you mentioned a scanner in your title - that would be listed in the specs for whatever scanner you are looking at.
Apr 13, 2018 10:52:33 #
Seems best bet was Kodachrome, better than Exktachrome. BW film like some Ilford slower speed with higher contrast ratio has more info.
Apr 13, 2018 10:53:56 #
Rickyb wrote:
How many pixels are there in Kodachrome and other slide films? What about color negs and BW negs? There is a differential.
This is old (2008) from Ken Rockwell
Apr 13, 2018 11:20:03 #
Rickyb wrote:
How many pixels are there in Kodachrome and other slide films? What about color negs and BW negs? There is a differential.
If memory serves, I saw a figure of 35 MP for Kodachrome 25; the figure was based on resolution. Since slide films are analog, there's no good way of comparing.
Apr 13, 2018 11:47:48 #
Rickyb wrote:
How many pixels are there in Kodachrome and other slide films? What about color negs and BW negs? There is a differential.
Of course film doesn't have pixels so we don't know. However, with Kodachrome and Kodak Ektar 100 I found about 12MP is sufficient to get all the details there are on the film.
Apr 13, 2018 12:06:33 #
PeterBergh wrote:
....
Since slide films are analog, there's no good way of comparing.
....
Since slide films are analog, there's no good way of comparing.
Apples and oranges...
Grain ≠ pixel
Apr 13, 2018 16:32:27 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
Rickyb wrote:
Seems best bet was Kodachrome, better than Exktachrome. BW film like some Ilford slower speed with higher contrast ratio has more info.
Kodachrome was the sharpest color slide film, until Velvia came along. The sharpest black and white film today is Adox CMS 20 II (500 mp).
Apr 13, 2018 20:01:17 #
Rickyb wrote:
How many pixels are there in Kodachrome and other slide films? What about color negs and BW negs? There is a differential.
Before I was willing to go digital, I had a pro scan some Kodachrome 25 slides for me. After he returned the {3000x2000} scans to me, I set up my projector and compared projected slides to scans. For every detail I identified on a slide, I could find that detail on the corresponding scan, so I decided I would go digital once a 6mp camera was in my price range. Later, I got a new digital camera that could mount the K-mount lens used to take the slides in my test, and I discovered that 16mp images were much sharper than the slides were - so I am personally convinced that Kodachrome was giving me roughly 6mp sharpness.
I believe we are spoiled today, demanding much more sharpness from digital than we ever got from film, even from the very best film like Kodachrome.
Apr 14, 2018 06:26:00 #
garygrafic
Loc: South Florida
Stop, please stop with all this sharpness talk....why not take just a bit of that energy and put it into shooting pictures? Henri Cartier-Bresson? Ever hear of him?.......he says "sharpness is a bourgeois concept"
Apr 14, 2018 08:27:19 #
dsmeltz wrote:
This is old (2008) from Ken Rockwell
From my experience this Ken Rockwell graph looks just about right.
Apr 14, 2018 08:30:11 #
garygrafic wrote:
Stop, please stop with all this sharpness talk....why not take just a bit of that energy and put it into shooting pictures? Henri Cartier-Bresson? Ever hear of him?.......he says "sharpness is a bourgeois concept"
This is the fundamental difference between an artistic view of the situation and a technical view of that same situation. i.e. is it science or religion and can't they both be right?
Apr 14, 2018 08:54:07 #
garygrafic
Loc: South Florida
Point almost well taken.....my feeling...if one spends most of his/her time looking for the ultimate of sharp lenses please do not call yourself a photographer. Let's come up with a new designation but photographer? Afraid not.
Apr 14, 2018 08:57:12 #
Retina
Loc: Near Charleston,SC
garygrafic wrote:
Stop, please stop with all this sharpness talk....why not take just a bit of that energy and put it into shooting pictures? Henri Cartier-Bresson? Ever hear of him?.......he says "sharpness is a bourgeois concept"
Henri’s work was not always so dependent on sharpness as with other genres of photography. DaveC1 is correct about different aspects of a craft, if I understand him. Not unlike in performing music where an even slightly out of tune piano is unacceptable in a recital but can be tolerated in certain jazz situations even where the art is every bit as advanced. On the other hand, works with great technique can be devoid of art. I agree that in this age of affordable high precision equipment, the gear can take up more time and energy than the art. Nothing wrong with that per se if that is what someone likes.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.