Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The issue, Larry, isn't what the eye sees on the computer screen, but what the size of the file will allow a printer to do. A 1.2 meg raw image might produce a wonderful 72 dpi image when viewed on the web - but try to get a quality 20x24" print out of it. Besides which, I think the mine-is-bigger than yours race is coming to an end - it may even have come to an end at around the 8-10 meg sensor size. Now comes the competition to see who can do the most with that size in terms of image quality. On 5/25/06 8:08 PM, "Henning Wulff" <henningw@archiphoto.com> wrote: >> All you RAW addicts, don;t sneer at JPEG compression. An article in >> the latest issue of Science (Vol 312, Issue 5777) suggests that the >> eyes 125,000,000 cones and rods activate only 1,200,000 individual >> fibers in the optic nerve. This is a 10 to 1 compression ratio. >> >> If this is the case, then a 1.2 meg. RAW image contains all the >> information that the eye can see. >> >> Makes one wonder about the race to higher and higher pixel counts. >> >> Larry Z > > But the eye scans the picture and the brain composites and remembers....