I care. With large format scans you can enlarge/print much larger and also crop the hell out of the image if desired and still end up looking better than any 6mpixel image given a large enuff print. Sure at 4"x6" you wont notice but I dont make 4x6" prints anymore.....
I recently made some 11X17 digital color prints from scanned 4X9" crops (panoramas) from 8X10 ektachrome that are mind blowing detailed and grain free....Absolutely awesome looking... JCO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Bill D. Casselberry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Film is not dead :-) Rob Studdert wrote: > Try 67 on a good scanner, ~95.5M Pixels at 4000dpi so files > are just short of 600MB at 48b/p Yeah, but who in their right mind would care enough for that level of detail in an "image" these days? Surely noone would be willing to pay the extra costs incurred over a 6mpxl "image" from a consumer DSLR. Exception may be made for the sort of advertising agencies that Paul S. shoots for in Detroit, but lower down the scale most anything seems satisfactory - cheaper the better. Bill --------------------------------------------------------- Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------
