Bernie and others, I just printed an Olympus E1 test image* that was 2560x1920 pixels on my Epson 2200 printer at print size 12.5 x 16.67" (4/3 aspect ratio original image, remember) on 13x19" watercolor paper. At that size, the image is at 154 ppi. I thought that wouldn't be so great, but you know, it really looks mighty fine.
Now, I don't think the test image is necessarily the best test for a fine landscape image, but still, I feel pretty confident that it would be good enough for my style of image, which is often close-up landscapes. I don't work with glossy paper, but that could well be a different story at this scale of enlargement. I didn't touch the color or anything else, and it appears to be right on. Beautiful. Berry *The test image was 4 liquor bottles in front of Kodak gray and color patch scales, with some crayons in the foreground...in case you've seen it. on 6/30/04 3:55 PM, Bernie Kubiak at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Berry, > > I've gotten reasonable quality prints from my Minolta DiMage S414, but > there are a number of quality cameras out there now -- Oly E1, Pentax > *ist (a friend just got one - impressive camera), Nikon D70, Canon's > digital rebel. Check the reviews at dpreview.com or the commentaries > at luminous-landscape.com. I'm waiting for Minolta's DSLR before > deciding, since I have all Minolta glass at the moment. > > I'm hanging on to my 6x6's and 645's though -- both for darkroom and > scanning on the Epson 2450 (which I'll be upgrading soon). My trusty > Polaroid 4000 takes care of the 35mm stuff. > > Bernie > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Berry Ives > Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 10:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: traffic > > on 6/24/04 12:47 PM, Clark Guy at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> hey, everybody! >> >> How about a lively discussion of the importance of bit depth?? >> >> How about dye clouds vs. film grain??? >> >> (I'm kidding, I'm KIDDING!!) >> >> ;-0 >> >> Guy >> -----Original Message----- >> From: bernard comolet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 11:54 PM >> To: Clark Guy >> Subject: [filmscanners] traffic >> >> >> No more traffic on filmscanners ?? >> >> Bernard from Angoulême-France >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------- >> ---------- >> Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe >> filmscanners' >> or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message > title or >> body > > Maybe everybody has bought a digital camera! > > Seriously, I'm thinking of doing just that. But the trouble is that > they > keep getting better so rapidly that I find I must keep waiting! > > The ones I find most interesting right now are the Olympus E1 and the > Sigma > SD10. But the one I want may be the combination of the two. The > Fovian > chip is exciting, but what would you have if Olympus combined that > with the > E1 4/3 thing? > > My thinking is that there would be fewer problems if one went directly > from > a digital image to paper rather than having to scan film. In theory, > you > would have eliminated one stage in the process, and that would be > greater > simplicity. > > The final product I seek includes ~12x18 prints on watercolor paper, > using > an Epson 2200.... > > Berry > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body