Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/08/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Lew, I've always made a rough estimate of the sensor pixels divided by 300
for a print dimension in inches.
However, really that is simplistic. The image just doesn't translate the
same way. The lack of light scatter within the film and the lack of grain
really change the whole relationship. Plus, of course what the camera
software does with the information.
Have a look at what Doug Herr, for example, does with the digital back on
his R. That ought to be a close analogy with what the M8 ought to be capable
of.
I'm sure we've all seen very large prints made on wide format pro printers
from a good 6MP DSLR, too.
Cheers
Hoppy
Not leaping, but still impressed
-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Lew
Sent: Monday, 28 August 2006 06:40
To: 'Leica Users Group'
Subject: [Leica] Digital enlargement & enlightenment, please.
I think I know that there's a more or less fixed relationship between the
number of pixels on a ccd and the
maximum size of a print made from the resulting raw capture without
interpolation. So I have 2 questions:
1. What can we look forward to vis-avis the upcoming M8 and maximum
non-interpolated print size?
2. Are interpolations now good enough for me to stop worrying about
the limits of digital enlargement?
-Lew
_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information