29 Oct
2012
29 Oct
'12
7:44 a.m.
On 29 Oct 2012, at 3:54 , Jason McBrien <jbmcb1 at gmail.com> wrote:
Not sure if it is applicable in still-format
photography, but in the motion
picture world there is a concept of film to resolution equivalence. It's
particularly important as with film you are enlarging the 35mm stock by
several thousand percent when scanning into the digital domain. A "pixel"
in the conversion is considered to be the smallest object that can be
resolved and reproduced by the film or sensor. When using that comparison,
a 35mm print is roughly 20 megapixels, or 8K resolution, assuming the film
was shot and developed under ideal conditions. Scanning at any higher
resolution doesn't buy you more detail, as you start getting into the grain
at that point.
Such a conversion factor is meaningless without a frame size indication.
Here are some musings on this subject, in regards to still photography:
<http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.htm>
.tsooJ
--
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world: those that understand binary, and those
that don't.
--
Joost van de Griek
<http://www.jvdg.net/>