Digital BW, The Print

On Apr 10, 2009, at 8:23 PM, blueto49 wrote:

> Thanks for the post. I have been sitting here for the last couple of  
> months considering moving up from my 5D to a 5D II. I have continued  
> to vacillate considering that while the number of pixels goes up  
> ~64% the resolution only increases ~29%. Then again the bit depth  
> increases 400% and interestingly the resolution of the 5D II is  
> almost exactly a full frame of 35mm film scanned at 4000 dpi.

Well, I find both the increased resolution, and the increased dynamic  
range to be important. The dynamic range for any image size, the  
resolution for larger prints only.
>
> An old rule of thumb was that there was little to be gained from  
> drum scanning film beyond 2500 dpi. (The thought being that even  
> though you could extra more info you would be hard pressed to get  
> that extra info onto a print. ) In addition you eliminate a  
> processing step so those 21MP, would reasonably be worth say a ~40MP  
> film scan. In the range of a 6X7 neg scanned at 2500dpi? Guess I  
> will have to buy s 5D II to find out.

Much of what you were scanning was film grain. But as you note  
yourself, direct digital capture is worth more, pixel for pixel, than  
a scan. I would claim a higher rate than 2:1, but that would depend on  
how grainy the film was, and how good the scanner was, so I won't  
propose a number of my own.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
CDTobie@...


  ----------



Datacolor
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




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