The film v pixels comment was thrown in as an afterthought as a possible answer to my question. It wasn't even on my mind when I began. I am, however, going to leave it there for now with the expectation that some future mull will set me straight.
Thanks, Rob. Jack --- Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5 Feb 2006 at 16:29, Jack Davis wrote: > > > Yes, this is the sort of resolution test I'm talking about. > > If said lines are photographed, what lenses are used and how is it > then > > possible to discern up to 180 l/mm considering the limited > resolving > > ability of most lenses as discussed on this thread? > > Film resolving power vs pixel resolving power? > > If I overlooked an answer in your forwarded URL, I apologize. > > You have to be discussing the same thing for it to be relevant. My > guess is > that few films tests would involve broad spectrum light and the high > contrast > tests are practically lithographic in nature. How this relates to > photography > in a practical sense you can only guess. IOW the resolution specs > provided for > films can't be directly compared to digital system tests, ie > lens/sensor/demosaicing. > > It's easy to do a practical test of film vs digi using Pentax film > and digital > SLRs with the same lens on each body though I'm not about to do so. > At this > stage my money is on the film in a sheer resolution shoot-out > (assuming an > appropriate film was used). > > If I've missed your point I apologize in advance. > > > 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 > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
