Digital BW, The Print

Let me clarify what I am about to say.  I shoot Nikon AND I agree Canon
PROFESSIONAL digital is better at this point.

Now, let's think this through.  
1.  A wall is has no real reflection quality or ability to hold sharpness.
2.  The human eye does a LOT of compensation for color and sharpness for
everything it views.  The exact reason you CANNOT see true depth-of-field
when stopping down in the viewfinder.  The eye will over compensate for what
you think you see.
3.  Seth Resnick gets paid to do this.  Does anyone think Seth PAYS for
those "demo" cameras from Canon?

It's the same as a story in the recent "Studio & Design" by George
Tiedemann.  Whether or not S&D pays him for writing, does anyone really
think he has to buy a D2X when he can have a "demo?"

In ANY case, who knows what processing was done to any image?

I have been to Nikon, Canon and NPPA "short courses."  They all are based on
"WOW."

Seth

==-----Original Message-----
== On 
==Behalf Of Christer Rosewelll
==
==I attended a seminar in New Orleans by noted photographer 
==Seth Resnick about a year ago where he projected an image on 
==a wall, blowing up a detail of an eye to fill a wall probably 
==20 x 12. It was shot with the
==11 MB Canon 1Ds - talk about sharp. The whole image would 
==probably have covered a wall about 50' long,
==
==No grain. The Canon CMOS sensor is truly amazing - just as 
==Paul Roark says in a previous post.
==