Diffracted Moose wrote:
> OTOH, I didn't always agree with Dr. Diffraction (and others). Just reading
> the tables, it's easy to expect disaster.
> But, take some practical test pictures, and it's just not that bad.
I've found that the DoF rules of thumb don't seem to apply quite the
same in a fully digital workflow as they did in film or even hybrid
work flow. Scanned film does usually seem to show diffraction
characteristics that aren't visible in a DSLR image with the same
lens. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is the nature of
how the RGB sensel data is combined has a built in masking effect of
the diffraction that is countered by the same algorithm that combines
the RGB values together of adjacent pixels to create a new composite
value for the pixel.
When I apply the sharpening to correct for the pixel-merge blurring, I
am also correcting for any diffraction that is up to the same
diameter.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|