Re: anybody still shoot film?

[P. J. Alling]

I think they are trying to reduce noticeable grain.  Creating a smoother 
image. 

John Forbes wrote:

Mike, you do talk rubbish at times.  :-)  The grain is NOT the 
photograph,  in any practical sense.  If it were, why would film 
manufacturers seek to  reduce grain?

John

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:44:19 +0100, mike wilson 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

 On Sep 25, 2005, at 9:14 AM, mike wilson wrote:

There comes a point in resolution when scanning film that all   
you're  doing is resolving more emulsion defects too. At 2820ppi,  
I  can see  the grain clearly in ASA 100 film. Most of the 
benefit  from  3000 ppi  upwards is in grain imaging, rather than 
actual  picture  quality.



There's a contradiction in that last sentence.

  How so? Please explain.
I'm interested in seeing the photograph, not the grain.
 Godfrey

The grain is the photograph.  Therefore, anything that improves the  
grain image improves the picture quality.

Hair splitting, I know, but I freely admit to being a pedant  
extraordinaire.

mike










--
When you're worried or in doubt, 
	Run in circles, (scream and shout).