Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/02/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Rob Heyman wrote: > > It would only be noticeable if the viewing distance did not change. The > accepted viewing distance for a print is 1.5 times the diagonal. This allows > the human eye to see the entire image without "scanning". If we apply this > to an 10x8 the viewing distance is just under 13". To view a 60"x40" from > the same neg we should stand at around 80". In both cases our eye will see > the same amount of detail and the same amount of grain. DOF or even > apparent DOF does not change. If we view a large print from a lesser > distance, we are NOT looking at the picture, we are looking at other less > important or irrelevant stuff . Top pictures are not known for their DOF or > their lack of grain or the amount of magnification the negative underwent. > The PICTURE is of utmost importance. > > I am sure that some of you learned gentlemen will correct me if I am wrong. > > Rob H > ><Snip> from a practical point of view a normal lens on a 35mm camera is one inch: so you've got a 30 inch viewing distance with a 30x40 IN 4x5 a 210 is an 8 inch lens which is normal so your viewing distance from that 7.5 enlargement is 60 inches (8 x 7.5) seems like you've got twice the viewing distance to witness half of the problem! mark rabiner