Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,898   Posts: 1,584,346   Online: 790
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    333
    Interestingly Peak Imaging ask for d*gital files to be at a final print resolution of 254ppi...

  2. #22
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    You think that's good, check out Bluefire Police film That stuff is crazy. More resolution than your lens.

    http://www.frugalphotographer.com/ga...nlargement.htm
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  3. #23
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by Ektagraphic View Post
    I have heard of 20X30 prints from Kodachrome shot with Leica.
    Those must be gorgeous.
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  4. #24

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by Anon Ymous View Post
    If the maximum print width coming from a frontier is 8", a 135 frame is 24mm wide, and it prints at 300dpi, then it must be scanning at 2540dpi. Frankly, I don't really know; it's just some common knowledge, some data gathered from google and a bit of math.
    hopefully this doesn't get the thread shut down....you are correct in that it prints at 300dpi per output size. I think there is a little over scan going on too for borderless prints, just like overenlargement in optical minilabs. For example, when scanning for a 4x6 inch print, the resulting file is 1228x1818 pixels, where as an 8x12 is 2433x3637.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by EASmithV View Post
    You think that's good, check out Bluefire Police film That stuff is crazy. More resolution than your lens.

    http://www.frugalphotographer.com/ga...nlargement.htm
    Oh man....

    That stuff is awesome!

    Thanks for bringing that up!

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    421
    Images
    1
    To the guys who were comparing Gold 200 to Reala, why would you do that? The results of Gold 200 to me is like Kodak's version of a Friday afternoon off.
    If you would rather shoot some Kodak film, you've got to compare something as good as Reala to a good Kodak Neg. :-)

    Jed

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    333
    Oh I wasn't saying that Kodak don't make some great neg films, they do, it's just that sometimes Gold is the only thing you can find when you run out and you're desperate. Both Kodak and Fuji make some amazing films, films that even 15 years ago we would have drooled over the idea of.

  8. #28
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,909
    Quote Originally Posted by xtolsniffer View Post
    Oh I wasn't saying that Kodak don't make some great neg films, they do, it's just that sometimes Gold is the only thing you can find when you run out and you're desperate. Both Kodak and Fuji make some amazing films, films that even 15 years ago we would have drooled over the idea of.
    That is why we have been provided with internet!

    FreeStyle, B&H, Adorama, ....

    Steve
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Klosterneuburg, Austria
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    97
    It is even more suprising that top-quality large format lenses can achieve an abosute resolving power like a high-grade 35 mm lens!

    Neither enlargements nor high-resolution scans can resolve (!) the actual resolution of film, but a microscope will show the limits. Modern ultra-fine grained, ultra-thin emulsion color films such as Provia 100F will capture details far beyond practical use, as single blades of grass; but with large format film, you will capture the nerves of single leaves at the same distance.

    Color offset prints in books from Kodachrome 25 and 64 in the 1970s and 1980s revealed that with Leitz or Zeiss lenses, 35 mm photography delivered an image quality sufficient for double-sided illustrations in folio format. It depends on the lens, of course, but also on the film grain and the thickness of the emulsion layers.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Heinz_Anderle View Post
    It is even more suprising that top-quality large format lenses can achieve an abosute resolving power like a high-grade 35 mm lens!
    If anything, the contrary.
    It is remarkable that small diameter lenses can achieve an absolute resolving power equal to that of high-grade larger lenses. And often they can not.
    Not because they just are not good enough. But simply because they simply can not.

    Color offset prints in books from Kodachrome 25 and 64 in the 1970s and 1980s revealed that with Leitz or Zeiss lenses, 35 mm photography delivered an image quality sufficient for double-sided illustrations in folio format. It depends on the lens, of course, but also on the film grain and the thickness of the emulsion layers.
    Here we are are very close to the origin of the 35-mm-format-lenses-are-better belief.
    The burden of proof was on Leitz that the tiny format they chose for the Leica could deliver sufficient quality. (And they could, as long as you did not demand the impossible, i.e. expect the same image quality larger formats deliver.)
    The mere fact that their lenses had to be good to even come close to what larger formats produced with great ease, somehow has become inverted over time, now appearing as a believe that the lenses are better.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin