On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 9:49 AM, JC OConnell <hifis...@gate.net> wrote: > you are trying to define some sort of "absolute" DOF > which really doesnt exist unless you consider a certain > COC as perfect.
Actually, I'm claiming the opposite. That any definition depends on assumptions of the acceptable circle of confusion, and therefore is not "absolute". > The entire thread and original post was all about > the relative DOF ( how to increase or decrease > DOF in an image relative to ANY reference DOF ). But your claims regarding relative DOF are only valid if the image format (film size, crop factor, whatever you want to call it) is constant. A change in format leads to a change in allowable CoC, which you're dropping on the floor. If you dispute that the allowable CoC is different for different formats, then you are the one who is claiming there's an "absolute" DOF. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
