Re: filmscanners: 2700ppi a limiting factor in sharpness?

["Dave King" <kingphoto@mindspring.com>]

> > I want to apologize for the brusque tone in my previous post.
>
> Gee, thanks ;-)
>
> > What I
> > should have said, and am saying now, is that based on what you
write
> > here I doubt you would think these particular prints look great.
And
> > that, of course, is your choice, and it's OK with me that you
probably
> > wouldn't think they look great.  I was being defensive:)
>
> In all honesty, I'd LOVE to see them...but I do have 30 years of
> photographic experience, both professionally and amateurly...and I
am hard
> pressed to believe anyone could get a 2' x 3' print that's "great"
from 35mm
> 800 speed color film...  I have done 2' x 3' prints from 100 ASA B&W
35mm
> film...and I must say, they are grainy, and they look OK, but not
great.  I
> am very careful about my development and minimizing grain (D-76 1:1
for
> Plus-X)...so it's based on my experience that I am a "doubting
Austin".  It
> is, perhaps, just a difference in the word "great", but without
seeing them
> my self...and only based on my experience...well, you get the idea.

I don't mind grain, in fact for certain things I kinda like it.  I
like the slightly "impressionistic" effect of the image falling apart
as you get very close, and then see the "molecular" structure of the
image instead.  There can be a certain beauty in that.  But still, I
don't find current 800 films that grainy.  I feel that Fuji NHGII
probably has the finest grain of the current crop, and that's what I
shoot.

To me a "great" print is one that is faithful to the original film,
and/or the artists intent.  That leaves a lot of room, doesn't it?
The shot on your web site is quite nice BTW, and I usually don't like
"kid" shots.

> BTW, what the heck did you mean by "Based on the orientation..."?

Did I say that??  :)

Dave