I meant to say that I agree. A better scanner would further improve the MF results. But both of these samples are flawed because of the interpolation method chosen. In my experience, "nearest neighbor" does not yield good results. Paul On Jan 24, 2007, at 8:17 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> > On Jan 24, 2007, at 6:59 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: > >> On 23/01/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Someone will find fault because it isn't a proper test. >>> I find it to be very strong anecdotal evidence though. >> >> And the differences only become more apparent when using a good >> dedicated film scanner to scan a shot made using a modern MF lens. >> >> -- >> Rob Studdert >> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA >> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 >> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ >> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
