OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

As Ronald Reagan would have quipped----"There he goes again." (Canon)-----ew

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

Wise guy---the first remark posed equaling a 400 mega pixel film with 12 digital image stitched together or did I get that wrong. Please tell me how he got 400 mega pixels digital. Then tell me how the same technique with 12--9x9 film sheets wouldn't therefore follow his arithmetic----even though as you say a third grader can figure that out---can you?------ew

srt101fan

To User ID's question "What year is it":

From all I see and read it's the year of the loon..... 🙄

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

You can say that again---particularly with the ideologues on UHH?-----ew

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

If you're concerned about quality why did you bring up resolution? You're not ignorant enough to think that resolution is the primary technical quality factor for a photograph are you? Hmmm....

So try and duplicate this with your 8x10 camera. The camera that took this photo, Dumpster Ansel, fit in my pocket (great Schneider lens too). I'm sharing it here on the internet with lots of people who can see it and enjoy it. How do you share your high resolution images with hundreds of people all over the world so that they can appreciate that awesome resolution? Who will ever see them? And how would you take this photo in the first place? You're going to walk the city alleys with your huge tripod and camera and film holders. My camera that took this photo could save as many photos as I wanted to take while out on a walk -- I could easily take four dozen photos all saved on a tiny SD card in the camera and barely dent it's capacity. What do 24 8x10 film holders weigh and how are you going to carry them? What do 48 sheets of color 8x10 film cost with processing?

I've shot 8x10 film and even did field work with a 4x5 camera, but I love taking photographs. I carry a camera everywhere I go and take photos almost every day -- try and duplicate that with your 8x10.

(Download)

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

As a poster said a few minutes ago----this is the year of the loon. Obviously you don't read my posts except for provocative headlines?----You are correct---you can take any quality you want---phone--point and shoot--16mm or whatever meets your fancy. I also said I have a dozen film and a dozen digitals for different shooting--(but was criticized even for that as if my mention was a boast) I mentioned that to forestall your criticism, but to no avail? That is not the topic. But megapixels is a perpetual topic on UHH. But the conversation always concludes that digital outperforms film. My point is that film outshines digital with the proper size and type and, of course processing and other factors. Certainly one does not take candid camera shots with an 8x10. Did anybody claim that? In the photo books they show a camera the size of a house used for some World's Fair giant panarama. Ladders were needed to adjust and insert the film.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Optimized IQ and pixel enlargement (AI interpolation) ......along with multi-image stitching.
.

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

The topic is resolving power of 35mm size sensors vs the resolving power of film. Here is the underpinning of this discussion topic---in the graphic from Purdue Engineering.---Eric

Page from PDF from Photographic discourse from Purdue Engineering

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Not if you're concerned about image quality. For best possible IQ digital is the superior medium.

User ID

There was no mention at all of stitching multiple 9x9” images. Don’t see where you got that from.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

That information is laughably outdated and incorrect. The bit depth of a camera's ADC does not determine or measure the dynamic range of the sensor and the dynamic range of the sensor does not determine the ADC bit depth. We're up to 16 bit ADCs now on the top end with 14 bit the common standard. Can you quote a reliable source?

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

Dear (User ID) blank:----You are correct. Stitching and slides or whatever gizmo makes 12 images was not a mentioned topic either. But somehow all that was put forth to prove that full frame digital could somehow compare with with large film is basic resolution.-----ew

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Fuji Velvia (ASA 50) is spec’d to resolve 160 LP/mm

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

The burden of proof is on your shoulders---not mine. This is true engineering data and the same set of graphics also discusses the maters of mirrorless vs mirror composition and focus. And therefore it is not outdated--if you have corrections and later data----give that here and explain in what cameras it is offered. Don't just blow off and make UHH wise cracks such as Purdue is laughable and wrong?-----ew

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

That is telling them----160lp/mm is four time the modest estimate used by Purdue Engineering. So itd gets more and more favorable for film sizes.----Eric