Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Film, especially 35mm film, is not capable of storing nearly as much data as you might think. The more steps in the process, the worse. http://www.dantestella.com/technical/formats.html#small Is a discussion of film resolution and its theoretical limits with continuous-tone subjects. Even when you plug in gigabit film's theoretical resolution with a continuous tone image (700 lp/mm if I recall), it is a joke, because you have to enlarge it or scan it with equipment that is far less capable (59lp/mm is about the best you can do without a drum scanner). The formula is on that URL above, so you can calculate you your heart's content. If you use a scanner, use your lens resolution, film resolution and scanner resolution (long-side resolution / 36mm / 2). If you use a digican, it's the lens resolution and the sensor resolution (take the long side resolution / sensor long side dimension / 2 / 3). You can omit the last factor of 1/3 if you believe that interpolation does not hurt resolution. Tech Pan on a Leica with a 120lp/mm objective stage gets you something like 40lp/mm at best; a 6x9 camera with TMY (a 400 speed film) will get 24lp/mm. Really kind of sobering. Cheers Dante By contrast, with a typical 35mm setup, On Saturday, March 8, 2003, at 07:19 AM, animal wrote: > Hi, i,m trying to find an article on the amount of information film can > hold. > So as to compare it with nanotech memories as described in > http://www.zurich.ibm.com/st/storage/millipede.html > would any of you point me in the right direction? > simon > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > ____________ Dante Stella http://www.dantestella.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html