[Leica] new 1ds mark II

[bladman99 at yahoo.ca (Dan C)]

Hold on.....in the old days, I heard stories about photographers who would
make MF sized dupes from 35mm negatives to fool magazine editors who
wouldn't accept 35mm film.   I am absolutely certain that  if you upsampled
your D100 images to whatever size the magazine required, they wouldn't know
the difference.  I guess I should have prefaced this with a "most normal
magazine, such as SI, NG, the various newsmagazines", and then, only maybe.

Just MHO.

-dan c.



At 08:18 PM 21-09-04 -0230, Greg Locke wrote:
>In the reproduction and printing press world  the higher end magazines and
>publications need 450 dpi (due to presses that do more than 4 colour process
>now) at a given size.
>My Nikon D100 gives me 10 X 6.5 inches at 300 dpi from it 6MP chip.
>Dirty math tells me that 5X7 is the maximum size I can get if 450 dpi is the
>minimum resolution permitted.
>
>The 5 or 6 assignments I shot on film since last August were for
>publications that fell into this category.
>
>...hence more pixels DO MEAN better quality to these publications.
>
>But you are right. This is a high end pro thing and something no hobbyist
>(or most pros for that matter) would ever need.
>
>Right now I would be happy with a 6-8MP full 35mm chip in a manual
>rangefinder that mounted Leica glass :^)
>
>...or have we discussed this one already?
>
>
>Greg Locke
>St. John's, Newfoundland
>http://blog.greglocke.com
>
>> So maybe the truth is, a 5-8 mgp is just fine for 99.9% of 
>> us, so why are people knocking their brains out being sucked 
>> into the larger is better mgp myth when you can't see the difference?
>> 
>> ted
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>