Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/08/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 04:39 PM 8/27/2006, you wrote: >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 Lew - It depends. That sounds wishy-washy but it's true. I'm doing all of the digital conversions and getting files ready to print for an exhibition of 9 different photographers using 9 different cameras. All photographers were required to shoot in RAW and send their untouched files to me. It's amazing what a difference there is in photo quality. Some of the photos shot at high ISOs are unusable, some are as good as any shot at lower ISOs. It doesn't seem to have as much to do with file size (although that is very important when you get into larger prints) as to how the camera handles higher speeds. We have made panoramic prints 3' wide that look wonderful and others at 16x20 that are marginal and will probably be eliminated. All of the photos were shot with available light so your mileage may vary with flash or bright sunlight, but my opinion is that camera brand matters more than number of pixels. Tina Tina Manley, ASMP, NPPA http://www.tinamanley.com