This entire exercise was simply for the purpose of showing that yesterday's
lenses and film weren't as primitive as some of today's young whippersnappers
and digital geeks seem to think. Of course an 8-foot-wide print of this
negative wouldn't bear close-up inspection, unless someone had an interest in
the study of the grain pattern and structure of Panatomic-X.
The highest resolution scan I am capable of making is 5400 d.p.i. After
cropping, the scan in this instance is 7400 pixels wide. Obviously, to make an
8-foot-wide print, it would have to be printed at 72 d.p.i. Duh!
This whole thing has degenerated into a nit-picking contest, which, if I were a
person of normal sensibilities, would make me regret ever having started it at
all. But I don't. I'm far too contrary and not nearly wussy enough for that.
I don't take any of this stuff all that seriously. IT'S A ****ING HOBBY! I DO
THIS FOR FUN!
No small furry animals were harmed, nor was human life taken, or even
threatened, during any part of this endeavor. Of course, it ain't over yet.
Walt
--
"Anything more than 500 yards from
the car just isn't photogenic." --
Edward Weston
-------------- Original message from Winsor Crosby : --------------
>
> I guess it is a matter of taste, but even Ansel's LF prints don't look
> good to me when they are 8 feet wide, unless I am at least 30 feet
> away.
>
> I really think this is a straw man you have set up for rollicking
> discussion. Who, of any substance, has claimed that common digital is
> better than large format? Of course there is large format digital with
> scanning digital backs, but obviously that is not what is being
> discussed.
>
>
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California
> USA
> On Jul 29, 2004, at 9:14 AM, Walt Wayman wrote:
>
> > Didn't say it would be a good print. Just said that's how big it
> > would be. Just trying to put it all in perspective, you know. No
> > print 8 feet wide is going to be "good" unless it's made from at least
> > a 6x9cm tranny or negative. Of course, 4x5 in. would be even better.
> > But I'm sure something digital would be, oh, so much better.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|