Thomas Bryhn wrote:
At 07:54 29.06.2003, Moose wrote:
OK, so stop listening to the marketing people and think about it.
The most technically sensible sensor is square. A square sensor uses
880f the image circle of the lens and 35mm uses 59%, or only 2/3 of
the square. With a square, you minimize the size, weight and cost of
the lens relative to the amount of information gathered.
No you don't! You stop your argument when it's only half finished, by
your logic the sensors should be circular. It's a sound argument, and
I have no problem with square or circular sensors, or banana shaped
for that matter.
Right, but the electronic processes of current sensor technology are all
based on a rectangular grid pattern, where each pixel is defined, and
its data actually retrieved, through its xy position on the grid. So, in
the current state of technology, I believe my statement is correct. Of
course if people preferred round images, the technology maight have been
developed differently.
My point was only that it puzzles me to see film manufacturers use one
set of length/width ratios, paper manufacturers a second set, and now
digital sensors use a third - and it's largely the same companies. If
they REALLY wanted to do it right and minimize waste, they'd first
make a sensor in the aspect ratio people use the most and then make
the papers to fit. Instead they throw us a line about reducing waste
by making the sensor fit the century old paper dimensions - without
mentioning what ratio people actually prefer and use when they
print/enlarge - and then the sensor doesn't even fit the paper.
From my perspective, each image has its own proper length to width
ratio, which will seldom match any standard paper size. I attended a
gathering of mostly MF folks who get together to show their pics. One
fellow uses a Hassy and prints the whole image for each shot. So we were
treated to many 24x24 images of his photo visit to Japan. Beautifullly
exposed and printed Veivia. It drove me and others crazy to see all
these fabulous images trapped in all the extraneous material that was
included in the print to preserve the whole photo. Hey, that's his
vision, but he kept talking about how hard it was to sell his work and
couldn't see one big thing that was holding him back.
I'm not loosing sleep over this...
Neither is,
Moose
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|