Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Pixel resolution for 8x10 was: Re: [Leica] Reasons to use film
From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:37:16 -0500
References: <C77FA706-6555-11D8-8D1F-0003938C439E@btinternet.com>

On Feb 22, 2004, at 11:40 AM, Frank Dernie wrote:

> None of what you write here agrees with my practical experience. The 
> grain on my scanned negative film is much uglier than digital - but 
> scans of  transparencies ar OK. I have certainly never used a 
> photoshop grain filter - the idea that this would make a more pleasing 
> image is at best a matter of opinion.

I agree the appearance of  film grain is a matter of opinion. 
Nonetheless 1) people have gone to the trouble to write photoshop 
filters that *add* grain to digital images 2) gaussian noise is much 
more pleasing than pixelated noise at any given level of noise.

> There are certainly no visible "rectangular grains" in any of my 
> pictures, but I have never owned a camera with fewer than 2.2 
> megapixels. This camera made reasonable 10x8 prints, considering it is 
> a P&S camera.

That roughly corresponds to a printing resolution of 75 dpi. You might 
find that acceptable. I am saying that many people would print an 8x10 
at 300 dpi which is four times that resolution.

> The earliest digital cameras did produce a mosaic effect and were 
> unusable for normal photography.
> I have never heard 360 ppi quoted as a maximum resolution,

The Imageprint RIP uses this as a maximal resolution (at least the lite 
version). I personally can't see any significant increase in print 
resolution (with my naked eye) beyond this. You can certainly print at 
a higher resolution -- I am only suggesting that this may not result in 
a better print.

I *am* saying, however, that most people can see a difference between 
75 dpi and 300 dpi (8 megapixel for 8x10) or 360 dpi (10 megapixel for 
8x10).

> I would be interested what digital equipment you have been using to be 
> so disappointed? In my experience digital has been in every way 
> superior to my expectations.

I am hardly disappointed in digital. I've used and written too many 
digital imaging products and techniques to list. What I am essentially 
saying is this:

For 4x6 prints both film and digital P&S are fine (maximal visible 
printed resolution is 3 megapixel).

For 8x10 although 6 megapixels might be acceptable, there is a 
*visible* improvement moving to 10 megapixels assuming all else equal 
(i.e. noise is constant).


> A 10x8 camera is unusable for anything I do so its well known 
> potential superiority would not be realisable.
>
...
> I still use medium format when ultimate quality is required it 
> produces results clearly better than the best digital I can afford. 
> 35mm is dead in the water - it offers no worthwhile advantage, I have 
> only used two films in my (well used since 1985) M6 for the last 18 
> months. That was when I wanted to use my 12mm lens.

I use 35mm film for ergonomics. The batteries in my M last for a long 
time (M6) or forever (M3). It is compact yet with great optics. The 
film is a great archival format yet I can easily scan it and print it 
digitally (all my color and some B/W) or I can print it optically 
(B/W). I expect that film will be around for alot longer than people 
are predicting -- indeed new 8x10 films have been introduced in the 
past several years e.g. Bergger.

I don't long for a digital D-SLR for the exact same reason my trusty 
Canon EOS 10s is used for about 5% of my shooting (the Canon 100mm 
Macro is a nice lens at a great price :-). Perhaps I will buy an 
Epson/Cosina digital M or a Leica digital M. What I am *not* going to 
do is buy into planned obsolescence by paying $ thousands for a 6 
megapixel sensor.

Jonathan

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com> (Re: Pixel resolution for 8x10 was: Re: [Leica] Reasons to use film)
In reply to: Message from Frank Dernie <Frank.Dernie@btinternet.com> (Re: Pixel resolution for 8x10 was: Re: [Leica] Reasons to use film)