Re: Future of Photography (was filmscanners: real value?)

[B.Rumary]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Clark 
Guy wrote:

> WHY?
> because we are already approaching the limit of how small a single pixel can
> be.  It can't be smaller than a wavelength of light, and we are approaching
> this limit even now.  On top of that, the smaller they are the more noisy
> they become, so that creates a limit on size as well.
>
I think you are way off here! Present pixel sizes are nowhere _near_ the 
wavelength of light; in fact I don't think it would even be possible to 
manufacture anything remotely that small with foreseeable technology.

As for the resolution needed to equal 35mm film, I think I have seen it quoted 
that it would need about 8-10 Megapixels. I imagine they are talking about 
mid-range print film here, such as Kodak Gold 100. Fine grain emulsions like 
Kodachrome would obviously need more pixels.

Brian Rumary, England

http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm