Hi all,
Recently I have been able to compare the quality of an image I obtained from
scanning my negative with one obtained commercially. (see Parawa, in the
2003 exchange)
Using my little old HP Photosmart with SCSI card, I obtained a marvellously
sharp image ( with some help from unsharp-mask) and a jpeg file of 5.3 MB.
Nothing I got from what I have considered to be even a good processor even
came close.
Which has led me to think - no wonder that Kodachrome has been so
popular. With these fine-grained slides, photographers could actually see the
benefits of their expensive lenses and cameras. But not so from most
producers of prints of any kind.
And I think this is part of the appeal of digital cameras. The immediacy also
is an appeal, but combined with the ability to send SHARP images directly
to digital printers does make it possible to obtain with minimum effort, really
sharp prints instead of the disgracefully fuzzy images that are often sold.
Steps off soap-box.
Brian
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|