On 5/7/2011 6:13 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I can't argue with the results but keep in mind that you are playing a
> trade-off game of depth of field against resolution loss due to
> diffraction. The E-1 is diffraction limited at about f/9, higher res
> E-thingies at about f/6.3. Depth of field is based on viewing size so
> what looks good as a web image may not look so good as a large print,
> especially if taken at several stops beyond the diffraction limit.
You've hit an important point, I think. Many photographers, including some
pros, are working to web display size. As Jim
is working to around 900 pixels on the long side, that's only about 0.6 MP, so
of course what he is doing is working for
him.
Especially now with 18 MP images, I have to remind my occasionally obsessive
self that the subtle defects I notice at
100% will never be visible to anyone but me, even if printed quite large.
> But I have no advice on where the happy middle ground is other than
> experimentation.
Keeping in mind the likely display limitations of my images, I do fairly often
go beyond f8 for APS and f11 for FF in a
conscious trade-off between ultimate resolution within the DOF and greater DOF.
Focusing Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|