4 Aug
2005
4 Aug
'05
7:02 p.m.
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:35:37 +0100 (BST)
ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) wrote:
You can buy a 4x5 'digital back' for that camera. A quick google search
brings up places that mention them, but I can't find a place that lists
a typical price. I know they used to cost about the same as a luxury
sports car, so it's probably not an online 'shopping cart' item to
purchase.
Then you'd have the 'bellows, lens, etc.' arrangement that you're
familiar, and probably very skillful, with. All the large format tricks
would work.
You'd also be dealing with 450MB images for each shot.
On Thursday 04 August 2005 13:49, Tony Duell wrote:
Please, not this argument again...
What he meant is "good enough" quality, for producing calendars or
books from. A 20"x20" piece of sheet film isn't necessary for doing
that,
No, I think 5"*4" would be adequate :-)....
One of the main advantages of that sort of camera, of course, is the
movements (you can shift and tilt the lens board and the film back)
which should help reduce perspective distortion. I am told you can
process digital images to do this, though.
How about
taking good quality digital photos of the exhibits and
then
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That is surely a contradiction in terms and a few k$ (or perhaps less) digital camera can
produce "good
enough" photos. In fact, I'd argue that to most people (Tony, as
you should know, you're not 'most people') a $300-$500 digital
camera will produce "good enough" results.
You do realise I paid less than that for my monorail camera. The
camera itself was \pounds 150, a new set of bellows \pounds 40, and
the lens/shutter came off a battered-but-repairable Micropress which I
paid \pounds 50 for. And the results are way beyond any digital camera
you're likely to see.