Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/10/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Easy decisions for M9 or not
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:44:28 -0700
References: <27649946.1256005943935.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <5D25120D-E811-443E-9F27-F57DB6864979@gmail.com> <D94F37E3-6BEB-42B6-B4BF-68552FA6F3CC@frozenlight.eu> <016501ca513f$1fc4a150$5f4de3f0$@net>
 
On Oct 19, 2009, at 9:38 PM, Frank Filippone wrote:

> I don't get it.... why does anyone intentionally require  "fake  
> pixels"?
> What good are they?
> Is it a printing thing?
>
> Frank Filippone
> red735i at earthlink.net
>
> They just care about the number of pixels. You can
> create fake pixels in Photoshop or more specialized tools to bump up
> the file size to the 50 MB usually required.


sounds daft, having nothing to do with quality, technical or  
otherwise....



Steve


>
> Nathan
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] Easy decisions for M9 or not)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Easy decisions for M9 or not)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Easy decisions for M9 or not)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Easy decisions for M9 or not)