ISNT! not "is"! -----Original Message----- From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 7:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: sad stuff about stock photography and up-to-date technology
645 is going to look nearly as good as 4x5 no matter who many Mpixels you squeeze out of it with a hi-res scanner because all you are doing is magnifying the film grain and lens flaws when you scan over about 2400 ppi. JCO -----Original Message----- From: Nick Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 7:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: sad stuff about stock photography and up-to-date technology I'm estimating 85+ Mpixels from 645 slides with the Epson 4870 scanner. I'll let you know when I get it all set up. Nick -----Original Message----- From: "J. C. O'Connell"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 21/08/04 23:53:08 To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: sad stuff about stock photography and up-to-date technology You can get over 100 Mpixel images from 4x5 film with inexpensive Epson 3200 scanners. JCO -----Original Message----- From: Caveman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 6:51 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: sad stuff about stock photography and up-to-date technology Just a quick question. Are there some photogs really using 50 MP Foveon digital backs or is everybody just wildly interpolating in Photosomething ? Or are they supposed to scan from 8x10 slide sheets ? Herb Chong wrote: > annsan and i have had an off-list discussion. it's out of her price > range, especially when she upgrades her computer to run CS adequately.
