Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] new 1ds mark II
From: bladman99 at (Dan C)
Date: Tue Sep 21 19:57:05 2004
References: <1095817933.4798.8.camel@failsafe>

I guess my take on all this is to take a file from a 6mp camera, upsample
it in Photoshop (or better yet some other program such as qimage which has
better upsampling routines) so that you have a 24" x 36" 720 dpi image,
copy it onto a CF card or CD and get it printed at a quality service
bureau.   Do the same with a 16mp camera.   Compare the two prints.
Forget what the magazine photo editor wants, that's a whole different
issue.   If you have to obey his commands, fine, but he still may be full
of horse c***.

Decide for yourself which is better.   I've already decided.

RAW files are generally smaller than the corresponding bitmap they
represent.   For instance, my 5mp Minolta Dimage 7 produces 14 meg TIF
files, but the RAW files are 9 meg.   And people complain because
apparently they should actually be smaller, more like 6 meg, but Minolta
wasn't very efficient in the way they created their RAW files.

-dan c.

At 10:39 PM 21-09-04 -0400, Don Dory wrote:
>You all ask how big the files are?  Well the rule of thumb is an
>expanded RAW file is three times bigger, three times 16 is 48 so your
>full frame files after your RAW conversion will hit close to 50 MB.

In reply to: Message from feli at (Feli di Giorgio) ([Leica] new 1ds mark II)
Message from dorysrus at (Don Dory) ([Leica] new 1ds mark II)