Maybe your math is off? 6X7 at 4000ppi is approx
120MPixel so color would be ~360 Mp not
700Mp. Unless your using 48bit color,
but then the 4X5 scan would be 600Mpixel
at 48bits
For the same amount of pixels, the larger
format at lower scan resolution is going
to look better due to less film grain
visablity.
there is know way of getting around
the fact that large format is better
than medium format in terms of image
quality.....
JCO
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 8:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Just printed the test pictures from the *ist D...
On 9 Aug 2003 at 17:50, William Robb wrote:
> We've been here before. I have printed both 4x5 and 6x7 optically. Up to
> print sizes of 11x14, there is a small difference in visible quality, with
> 4x5 having the edge. It isn't a great enough difference to be visible at
> normal viewing distances, you really have to get up close to the pictures
to see
> it. At 16x20 and larger, the 4x5 definitely shows visible improvement at
normal
> viewing distances. I don't know if the same holds true for scanned
negatives.
How do you think Johns LF (300MB+) scans would hold up against my Mamiya 7
(67)
shots scanned at 4000dpi (700MB+)? I think we are comparing scanners again.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
