Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/04/12

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

Subject: [Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution
From: billcpearce at cox.net (Bill Pearce)
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 20:07:01 -0500
References: <osxM1n00u0AFV7C01sxN9J> <6BB0304864D946309D842C5A630088C2@billHP><03c601cf5650$28fd8730$7af89590$@verizon.net> <p4eZ1n01P0AFV7C014eaVB>

But aren't there other "measurements" of the quality of our photos than just 
resolution?

-----Original Message----- 
From: FRANK DERNIE
Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2014 11:35 AM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution

But surely a single grain in film is either exposed or not, whereas a pixel 
has, depending on the sensor, thousands of brightness levels. So they are 
not directly comparable and it would require a big patch of film containing 
thousands of grains to display the range of tones a single pixel is capable 
of, though clearly a patch of pixels would be required to compare the 
effect.



>________________________________
> From: Frank Filippone <red735i at verizon.net>
>To: 'Leica Users Group' <lug at leica-users.org>
>Sent: Saturday, 12 April 2014, 14:07
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution
>
>
>Several years ago, I did the calculations based upon the molecular
>particulate size of TMax100 film.  I picked that film because the density
>data was available, and it was the most consistent particulate size film
>available, and it was reputed to be the most consistent homogenous density
>mix of crystals within the sensitive film layer.
>
>My assumption was that the TMax100 crystalline molecule was the smallest
>discernible and quantifiable light capturing receptor.  Therefore, the
>closest analogy to a digital sensor pixel.
>
>As I remember it, the particulate size, and therefore the effective pixel
>density, was around 15MP per square inch.  The closest ( B+W only)
>comparison is the MM.
>
>The MM is about 10MP per square inch.
>
>Based upon this, and for all practical purposes, digital sensor technology
>resolution has caught up with chemical resolution.
>
>Too much time on your hands is a bad thing......you worry about things that
>are purely theoretical.  This happened to me as well when I first retired.
>Seems a pattern....
>
>Frank Filippone
>Red735i at verizon.net
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information 



Replies: Reply from frank.dernie at btinternet.com (FRANK DERNIE) ([Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution)
Reply from tedgrant at shaw.ca (tedgrant at shaw.ca) ([Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution)
In reply to: Message from billcpearce at cox.net (Bill Pearce) ([Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution)
Message from red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Comparing film and digital resolution)