ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Film resolution - was: Re: 3 year wait



Austin writes:

> Whether you believe 1000:1 is practical or
> not, isn't relevant, as film CAN record that.

Only if you have 1000:1 contrast ratios in the scene you are photographing,
which is extraordinarily unlikely.  If the contrast is lower, the fact that
film can record this at such high contrast is entirely irrelevant.

> Also, keep in mind that to scan RELIABLY you
> need to scan at around 2x the resolution you
> are trying to scan...so to reliably scan 4k
> per inch, you would need to scan at a resolution
> of 8k per inch.

Line _pairs_ per millimetre already account for this.  So to scan 120 lp/mm,
you need 120 pixels per millimetre.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.