Digital BW, The Print

No it is a 3 meg sensor - period. The others also have 1/3 of the 
resolution that they claim. There are a lot of ways to measure 
resolution on the bench and in any of those the Foveon is 3 megs. Step a 
red laser across it you will get 3 megapixels. Step a blue laser across 
it you will get 3 megapixels. Step a green laser across it  you will get 
3 megapixels. You cannot invent additional sensors than are not there. 
Of course if you step a red then blue then green laser across a 
conventional sensor you will get 1/3 the number of sensors advertised. 
The whole digital camera market is a shell game of inflating numbers. 
When you can put any of them on an airplain at 100,000 feet and read a 
license plate on a car - I will be interested. Until then I'll stick to 
film.

Truman



Jerry Olson wrote:

>Yo Austin.
>
>  
>
>>>Remember it
>>>was a comparison between a 9 megapixel chip (foveon)
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>No.  The Foveon (at least the one we are discussing) is a THREE M pixel, not
>>9.  You are confused about what a pixel is and isn't. 
>>    
>>
>
>You are confused. TECHNICALLY it is a 3 MP chip. It has the exact same
>quality that anybody elses 9 meapixel chip has. That is the whole point
>behind the foveon chip.
>
>  
>
>>You don't lose detail, you just don't get any more by upsizing.  If you take
>>two images.  One from a 3M pixel camera, upsize it to say 9 M pixels.  Then
>>compare it to a 9M pixel image, the 9M pixel image will have a lot more
>>detail.
>>    
>>
>THE FOVEON HAS THE SAME QUALITY AS ANYBODY ELSE'S 9 MEGAPIXEL CHIP. THAT
>IS THE WHOLE
>POINT BEHIND THE FOVEON PHILOSOPHY. IT IS DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGY.
>
>  
>
>>>Nobody could tell that if they were upsized or not. I'm only speaking of
>>>12x18 inch prints on 13x19 inch paper here. Not billboards.
>>>      
>>>
>>Er, I probably could.  I do it all the time.  The issue is, if you don't
>>know what detail isn't there, you don't know that it's missing.  Sharpness
>>does not require detail, they are two entirely different things.
>>    
>>
>
>I doubt you probably could.
>
>BUT I'VE MADE COMPARISONS WITH FILM. FILM IS NOT BETTER IN ANY WAY
>WHATSOEVER FOR AN 18 INCH PRINT !!!!!
>
>ENOUGH	!
>
>WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS TOO MANY TIMES ALREADY.
>
>JERRY
>  
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- Include your full name with your message.
>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 
>
>
> 
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>
>
>
>  
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]