Piers wrote
You have oversimplified, Brian. You have not mentioned
the lens, and if
that is, say, a jam jar, the maximum resolution is
likely to fall somewhat
short of the potential of the camera, so you
will not see any improvement
whatever the theoretical capacity of the
sensor.
Piers
On 18 Sep 2016 11:09 a.m., <bj [at] caverock.net.nz>
wrote:
>
> I'm still puzzled.
>
> Let's suppose we have two cameras, one
(a) with
> 2,000 pixels on the long side, and another (b) with 10,000
pixels on the
> long side, and take a photo with each.
>
> Now suppose
we print them each
> in a print which is 2,000 inches wide (on the long
side). Forget the
> absurdity of the dimensions for the moment.
>
> My
supposition is that the
> print from (b) will be 5 times sharper (5 x
more detail) than the one
> from (a) because each inch from it contains
information from 5 pixels,
> not just 1 pixel.
>
> Reply?
>
> Brian
>
I
deliberately kept the question simple. Deal with one aspect at a time,
is the ideal process.
If one is unable accept 2,000 INCHES as a
hypothetical print size, change the metric to cm or mm.
It makes no
sense in talking about this concept to muddy the waters by raising the
topic of differing lens quality.
Basically assume the same high quality
lens, to keep the argument even.
Brian
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|