Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/10/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I agree, discounting the appeal of film which has its own characteristics. I would never compare Kodachrome to digital and expect to get similar results. Kodachrome doesn't enlarge the same at all. With digital the grain does not interfere with the image, with Kodachrome, the grain defines the image. Tina On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Doug Herr <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net> wrote: > Larry Zeitlin wrote: > > >>> > For people that want to produce 11? x 14? to 16? x 20? prints or publish > their work in most consumer magazines, not display gigantic Colorama sized > prints from minuscule portions of the frame area, does the number of pixels > really matter? Inquiring minds want to know. > Larry Z > <<< > > Yes and no. For prints up to 18" x 24" (I haven't printed larger) the > DMR's 10MP has been adequate to make gallery owners swoon, and there's no > way I'd try printing a Kodachrome image that size and expect similar > quality. > > OTOH one of the stock agencies I'm working with has minimum pixel > requirements and the DMR's 10MP doesn't leave a lot of headroom for > cropping. The a7II's 24MP gives me a lot more cropping flexibility. YMMV. > > Doug Herr > Birdman of Sacramento > http://www.wildlightphoto.com > http://doug-herr.fineartamerica.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Tina Manley http:// <http://t.sidekickopen23.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJN7t5XYgfmKYPW4WzBHl3Mx_9dW3LqWkM56dQ1Jf7P8b5b02?t=http%3A%2F%2Ftina-manley.artistwebsites.com%2F&si=6038418186567680&pi=f1f357f0-df6b-4252-c4ef-6fb9e7c7adeb> www.tinamanley.com http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/