Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,540   Posts: 1,544,311   Online: 935
      
Page 24 of 24 FirstFirst ... 1418192021222324
Results 231 to 235 of 235
  1. #231

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    London (UK)
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    77
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    Edward

    Nicely followed through! How did you calculate the CoCs? I get 0.022 mm where you've got 0.011 mm.
    Ralph,

    For the 0.011mm value I used:

    c = (1/60)/57.3 x 10 x 25.4 / 7

    i.e. converting 1/60 of a degree to radians and converting 10 inches to mm. But it's quite possible that I've slipped a factor of two somewhere by not allowing for line pairs or something.

    Then I used:

    (vn - v) / vn = c / d

    from the Wikipedia page to get vn for the near focus point, and found the corresponding object distance 'u' using the thin-lens formula:

    1 / f = 1 / u + 1 / v

    as you will of course realise. Then I repeated the process for the far focus point etc.

    Even if the standard viewing distance for a 10x8 print is of order ten inches or so, I might view such a print in a gallery from a distance of six feet, say, and I certainly wouldn't look at a postcard print from six inches. So DoF turns out to be a bit of a slippery customer!

  2. #232
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,533
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward_S View Post
    ... But it's quite possible that I've slipped a factor of two somewhere by not allowing for line pairs or something. ...
    That's it!

    There is another minute error in there, because the viewing angle should be halved first, to calculate the tangent, and that value should be doubled again afterwards, but with tiny angles, such as these, it's negligible.

    None of this changes your point, though.

    Nice job!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails CoC0.jpg  
    Last edited by RalphLambrecht; 02-16-2011 at 03:18 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  3. #233

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    68
    Ralph, A friend of mine offered me to purchase a copy of your book for me. Honestly, I'm quite thrifty and I told him to wait until I check his copy in detail. Today passing by a bookstore I pulled a copy from the shelf and spent 5 minutes with it. I have to say that I don't remember any other book in the past few years bringing together so many interesting, important and ignored topics in photography. I'm sure most readers will feel encouraged to read more on each subject and debate it.
    Thanks for the work!

  4. #234
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,533
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by onnect17 View Post
    Ralph, A friend of mine offered me to purchase a copy of your book for me. Honestly, I'm quite thrifty and I told him to wait until I check his copy in detail. Today passing by a bookstore I pulled a copy from the shelf and spent 5 minutes with it. I have to say that I don't remember any other book in the past few years bringing together so many interesting, important and ignored topics in photography. I'm sure most readers will feel encouraged to read more on each subject and debate it.
    Thanks for the work!
    Thanks for the nice words! I'm really happy to hear that you like it. We've spend more than 10 years pulling this all together. Quite a few people (including a few APUGers) contributed thought, text and images. If it helps, it was worth it.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  5. #235

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    London (UK)
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    77
    Images
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    That's it!

    There is another minute error in there, because the viewing angle should be halved first, to calculate the tangent, and that value should be doubled again afterwards, but with tiny angles, such as these, it's negligible.
    I'm more accustomed to hand-waving, order-of-magnitude type stuff...

    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post

    None of this changes your point, though.

    Nice job!
    Thanks!



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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