# God warns that 34.8 MP is the end of the digital road

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by large person, Mar 25, 2008.

1. ### large personGuest

34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.

Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).

God also declared that the top optical resolution available in any
meaningful sense is 100 lines per mm, which is really 100 line-pairs
per mm i.e., 200 dots per mm. No lens truly resolves higher.

It was also set into stone by God that the A2 size (420 x 594 mm) is
the maximum print size that has any relevance to photographic work to
be viewed close-up. Of course there can be larger sizes but they will
be viewed from further away.

Lastly, God made the human eye incapable of distinguishing detail (in
what is viewed close-up) greater than 300 dpi (dots per inch).

If we do the mathematics on what God gave to us:

A2 @ 300 dpi requires 34,802,530 pixels (=420*594*(300/25.4)^2)

35mm format @ 100 lp/mm requires 34,802,343 pixels (=24.084*36.126*200^2)
which is 99.9995% of the previous value.

Do you think that is coincidence? 34802530 and 34802343 ?

Certainly not. Only a fool could think so.

Like the fact that the lunar and solar disks subtend almost exactly the
same angle when viewed from earth, and that the moon's orbital period is
almost perfectly synchronous with the earth's rotational period, it is
a sure sign that God designed it that way.

So it follows that God has set 34.8 MP to be the holy grail of digital
photography. When that is reached in 35mm format, development may stop
and turn instead to improving S/N ratio, sensitivity, color accuracy
and similar parameters.

Canon and Nikon take note. Exceed 34.8 Megapixels and face God's righteous
wrath!

Footnote

God overlooked that the aspect ratio for 35mm is exactly 1.5000 and for
A2 paper it is approximately SQRT(2) = 1.41421(etc)
But then, such small details are only for small people!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

large person, Mar 25, 2008

2. ### G PaleologopoulosGuest

"large person" <> wrote
news:...
>
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>

Great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

G Paleologopoulos, Mar 25, 2008

3. ### John LockeGuest

On 25 Mar 2008 22:09:57 -0000, large person <>
wrote:

>34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
>Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
>nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
>36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).
>
>God also declared that the top optical resolution available in any
>meaningful sense is 100 lines per mm, which is really 100 line-pairs
>per mm i.e., 200 dots per mm. No lens truly resolves higher.
>
>It was also set into stone by God that the A2 size (420 x 594 mm) is
>the maximum print size that has any relevance to photographic work to
>be viewed close-up. Of course there can be larger sizes but they will
>be viewed from further away.
>
>Lastly, God made the human eye incapable of distinguishing detail (in
>what is viewed close-up) greater than 300 dpi (dots per inch).
>

Well "God" didn't make the human eye. Its a product of nature. And
at some point in time, nature will improve on it..unless of course man
does it first.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe
as it really is than to persist in delusion,
however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan

John Locke, Mar 25, 2008
4. ### Frank ArthurGuest

"large person" <> wrote in message
news:...
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
> Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing
> a
> nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
> 36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).

Sorry but God goofed. 24mm x 30mm which would yeild 8 x 10 inch
prints.
As far as I know God once produced the British Wrayflex camera using
35mm
film producing 24mm x30mm images. All others were heathens.

> God also declared that the top optical resolution available in any
> meaningful sense is 100 lines per mm, which is really 100 line-pairs
> per mm i.e., 200 dots per mm. No lens truly resolves higher.
>
> It was also set into stone by God that the A2 size (420 x 594 mm) is
> the maximum print size that has any relevance to photographic work
> to
> be viewed close-up. Of course there can be larger sizes but they
> will
> be viewed from further away.
>
> Lastly, God made the human eye incapable of distinguishing detail
> (in
> what is viewed close-up) greater than 300 dpi (dots per inch).
>
> If we do the mathematics on what God gave to us:
>
> A2 @ 300 dpi requires 34,802,530 pixels (=420*594*(300/25.4)^2)
>
> 35mm format @ 100 lp/mm requires 34,802,343 pixels
> (=24.084*36.126*200^2)
> which is 99.9995% of the previous value.
>
> Do you think that is coincidence? 34802530 and 34802343 ?
>
> Certainly not. Only a fool could think so.
>
> Like the fact that the lunar and solar disks subtend almost exactly
> the
> same angle when viewed from earth, and that the moon's orbital
> period is
> almost perfectly synchronous with the earth's rotational period, it
> is
> a sure sign that God designed it that way.
>
> So it follows that God has set 34.8 MP to be the holy grail of
> digital
> photography. When that is reached in 35mm format, development may
> stop
> and turn instead to improving S/N ratio, sensitivity, color accuracy
> and similar parameters.
>
> Canon and Nikon take note. Exceed 34.8 Megapixels and face God's
> righteous
> wrath!
>
>
>
> Footnote
>
> God overlooked that the aspect ratio for 35mm is exactly 1.5000 and
> for
> A2 paper it is approximately SQRT(2) = 1.41421(etc)
> But then, such small details are only for small people!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing
> services.
> The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From
> is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups
> other
> than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit
> www.panta-rhei.eu.org
> for abuse and hashcash info.
>
>
>
>
>

Frank Arthur, Mar 25, 2008
5. ### John BakerGuest

On 25 Mar 2008 22:09:57 -0000, large person <>
wrote:

>34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
>Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
>nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
>36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).
>
>God also declared that the top optical resolution available in any
>meaningful sense is 100 lines per mm, which is really 100 line-pairs
>per mm i.e., 200 dots per mm. No lens truly resolves higher.
>
>It was also set into stone by God that the A2 size (420 x 594 mm) is
>the maximum print size that has any relevance to photographic work to
>be viewed close-up. Of course there can be larger sizes but they will
>be viewed from further away.
>
>Lastly, God made the human eye incapable of distinguishing detail (in
>what is viewed close-up) greater than 300 dpi (dots per inch).
>
>If we do the mathematics on what God gave to us:
>
>A2 @ 300 dpi requires 34,802,530 pixels (=420*594*(300/25.4)^2)
>
>35mm format @ 100 lp/mm requires 34,802,343 pixels (=24.084*36.126*200^2)
>which is 99.9995% of the previous value.
>
>Do you think that is coincidence? 34802530 and 34802343 ?
>
>Certainly not. Only a fool could think so.
>
>Like the fact that the lunar and solar disks subtend almost exactly the
>same angle when viewed from earth, and that the moon's orbital period is
>almost perfectly synchronous with the earth's rotational period, it is
>a sure sign that God designed it that way.
>
>So it follows that God has set 34.8 MP to be the holy grail of digital
>photography. When that is reached in 35mm format, development may stop
>and turn instead to improving S/N ratio, sensitivity, color accuracy
>and similar parameters.
>
>Canon and Nikon take note. Exceed 34.8 Megapixels and face God's righteous
>wrath!
>
>
>
> Footnote
>
>God overlooked that the aspect ratio for 35mm is exactly 1.5000 and for
>A2 paper it is approximately SQRT(2) = 1.41421(etc)
>But then, such small details are only for small people!

Heretic! The Flying Spaghetti Monster hath decreed that thou shalt
shoot Kodachrome and only Kodachrome (or Tri-X if thou shootest black
and white). All else is of the demon Linguini and is blasphemy (though
the FSM hath allowed that thou mayest substitute Fujichrome in a
pinch). Whomsoever shall breaketh this rule shall, upon his departure
from the physical world, be condemned to a place of agony and despair
from which there is no escape, and where his sinful soul shall be
sauteed in olive oil with garlic and portabella mushrooms and cast
into a lake of fiery marinara for all eternity.

John Baker, Mar 25, 2008
6. ### Gutless Umbrella Carrying SissyGuest

large person <> wrote in
news::

> Canon and Nikon take note. Exceed 34.8 Megapixels and face God's
> righteous wrath!

Er, dude, I hate to tell you this, but that was exceeded by at least
one order of magnitude on production equipment at least ten years
ago.

--
Terry Austin

"There's no law west of the internet."
- Nick Stump

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy, Mar 25, 2008
7. ### measekiteGuest

large person wrote:
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
> Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
> nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
> 36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).
>
> God also declared that the

United States of America the land of the free and the home of the brave.
> top optical resolution available in any
> meaningful sense is 100 lines per mm, which is really 100 line-pairs
> per mm i.e., 200 dots per mm. No lens truly resolves higher.
>
> It was also set into stone by God that the A2 size (420 x 594 mm) is
> the maximum print size that has any relevance to photographic work to
> be viewed close-up. Of course there can be larger sizes but they will
> be viewed from further away.
>
> Lastly, God made the human eye incapable of distinguishing detail (in
> what is viewed close-up) greater than 300 dpi (dots per inch).
>
> If we do the mathematics on what God gave to us:
>
> A2 @ 300 dpi requires 34,802,530 pixels (=420*594*(300/25.4)^2)
>
> 35mm format @ 100 lp/mm requires 34,802,343 pixels (=24.084*36.126*200^2)
> which is 99.9995% of the previous value.
>
> Do you think that is coincidence? 34802530 and 34802343 ?
>
> Certainly not. Only a fool could think so.
>
> Like the fact that the lunar and solar disks subtend almost exactly the
> same angle when viewed from earth, and that the moon's orbital period is
> almost perfectly synchronous with the earth's rotational period, it is
> a sure sign that God designed it that way.
>
> So it follows that God has set 34.8 MP to be the holy grail of digital
> photography. When that is reached in 35mm format, development may stop
> and turn instead to improving S/N ratio, sensitivity, color accuracy
> and similar parameters.
>
> Canon and Nikon take note. Exceed 34.8 Megapixels and face God's righteous
> wrath!
>
>
>
> Footnote
>
> God overlooked that the aspect ratio for 35mm is exactly 1.5000 and for
> A2 paper it is approximately SQRT(2) = 1.41421(etc)
> But then, such small details are only for small people!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
> The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
> is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
> than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
> for abuse and hashcash info.
>
>
>
>
>
>

measekite, Mar 25, 2008
8. ### YoshiGuest

"large person" <> wrote in message
news:...
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
> Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
> nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
> 36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).
>
> God also declared that the top optical resolution available in any
> meaningful sense is 100 lines per mm, which is really 100 line-pairs
> per mm i.e., 200 dots per mm. No lens truly resolves higher.
>
> It was also set into stone by God that the A2 size (420 x 594 mm) is
> the maximum print size that has any relevance to photographic work to
> be viewed close-up. Of course there can be larger sizes but they will
> be viewed from further away.
>
> Lastly, God made the human eye incapable of distinguishing detail (in
> what is viewed close-up) greater than 300 dpi (dots per inch).
>
> If we do the mathematics on what God gave to us:
>
> A2 @ 300 dpi requires 34,802,530 pixels (=420*594*(300/25.4)^2)
>
> 35mm format @ 100 lp/mm requires 34,802,343 pixels (=24.084*36.126*200^2)
> which is 99.9995% of the previous value.
>
> Do you think that is coincidence? 34802530 and 34802343 ?
>
> Certainly not. Only a fool could think so.
>
> Like the fact that the lunar and solar disks subtend almost exactly the
> same angle when viewed from earth, and that the moon's orbital period is
> almost perfectly synchronous with the earth's rotational period, it is
> a sure sign that God designed it that way.
>
> So it follows that God has set 34.8 MP to be the holy grail of digital
> photography. When that is reached in 35mm format, development may stop
> and turn instead to improving S/N ratio, sensitivity, color accuracy
> and similar parameters.
>
> Canon and Nikon take note. Exceed 34.8 Megapixels and face God's righteous
> wrath!
>
>
>
> Footnote
>
> God overlooked that the aspect ratio for 35mm is exactly 1.5000 and for
> A2 paper it is approximately SQRT(2) = 1.41421(etc)
> But then, such small details are only for small people!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
> The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
> is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
> than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
> for abuse and hashcash info.
>

The primary flaw in this chain of reasoning is that there is no evidence
that a god exists.

Yoshi, Mar 25, 2008
9. ### MartinGuest

Yoshi wrote:

>>

> The primary flaw in this chain of reasoning is that there is no evidence
> that a god exists.
>
>

God exists, and the proof is oysters - he has a sense of humour

Martin, Mar 25, 2008
10. ### Michael GrayGuest

On 25 Mar 2008 22:09:57 -0000, large person <>
wrote:

>34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.

You have way too much time on your hands.
Get a job or something.

Michael Gray, Mar 26, 2008
11. ### Michael GrayGuest

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:39:36 +0000, Martin <>
wrote:

>Yoshi wrote:
>
>>>

>> The primary flaw in this chain of reasoning is that there is no evidence
>> that a god exists.
>>
>>

>God exists, and the proof is oysters - he has a sense of humour

"She" has a sense of humour...

Michael Gray, Mar 26, 2008
12. ### Ilya ZakharevichGuest

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
large person
<>], who wrote in article <>:
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
> Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
> nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
> 36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).

Judging by your numbers, you are running v10.4.8 of G*d. It is long
time to overdue for upgrade. Everybody else and their friends
upgraded to v10.6.4 long time ago.

According to v10.6.4, the ruling is that 144MP is the official limit
for 24x36mm sensors.

Hope this helps,
Ilya

Ilya Zakharevich, Mar 26, 2008
13. ### ben brugmanGuest

>
> God also declared that the top optical resolution available in any
> meaningful sense is 100 lines per mm, which is really 100 line-pairs
> per mm i.e., 200 dots per mm. No lens truly resolves higher.
>

To resolve 100 line-pairs per mm, Sqrt(2)*100 dots are needed. Only 200 dots
per mm can resolve 100 lines per mm if they are alligned properly. If they
are 'misalligned' the lines are not resolved but become a gray blur. If the
lines are alligned in some places and misalligned in other places you will
get moire.

So to resolve 100 line-pairs, you need 283 dots per mm. *)

Then you need real pixels which can resolve 100 line-pairs per mm for any
color, this bumps up the number of pixels by a factor of 3.

So 34.2*sqrt(2)*sqrt(2)*3, is the correct number of pixels according to your
reasoning. This works out to be 205 MP.

So next time when interpreting this kind of higher rules be more carefull.

ben

*)
Where does the sqrt(2) = 1.41 come from. In the sensor a pixels must be able
to distingisch between 'black' and 'white', to do that, at least half the
pixel should be 'black' or half the pixel should be white. The pixels should
be smal enough to fit a pixel in between two black lines to be at least for
50% white. To accomplisch this for all cases the pixels must be smaller than
the lines are. So the pixel must have an area twice the width of the line
squared. If the line is 1 wide the pixel should have an area of 2. So the
pixels sides are sqrt(2)=1.41 of the line thickness to resolve.
(Look at the resolution of different ccd's and you see that this sqrt(2)
works).

ben brugman, Mar 26, 2008
14. ### RobibnikoffGuest

"large person" <> wrote in message
news:...
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD

What god?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557

Robibnikoff, Mar 26, 2008
15. ### NosterillGuest

On Mar 25, 11:09 pm, large person <> wrote:
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
> Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
> nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
> 36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).

So Oskar Barnack is God? That would account for the perfection of the
Leica.

Nosterill, Mar 26, 2008
16. ### Chris MalcolmGuest

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Robibnikoff <> wrote:

> "large person" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD

> What god?

The increasingly popular god of sloppy arithmetic.

--
Chris Malcolm DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Chris Malcolm, Mar 26, 2008
17. ### Don Stauffer in MinnesotaGuest

On Mar 25, 5:33 pm, John Locke <> wrote:
> On 25 Mar 2008 22:09:57 -0000, large person <>
> wrote:
>
>
> Well "God" didn't make the human eye. Its a product of nature. And
> at some point in time, nature will improve on it..unless of course man
> does it first.

We already have- binoculars, telescopes, etc. From now on humans
control evolution (on THIS planet, anyway). Of course, although I am
a retired physicist, I also think that God specified the laws of
nature, so he/she indirectly, in a way, designed the eye

Don Stauffer in Minnesota, Mar 26, 2008
18. ### rwalkerGuest

"large person" <> wrote in message
news:...
> 34.8 MEGAPIXELS AND NO MORE. THAT IS FINAL, AND GOD RULED THIS.
>
> Long ago, God set out that 35 mm is the perfect film format bearing a
> nominal frame size of 24 x 36 mm and an exact frame size 24.084 x
> 36.126 mm (less a 0.9 mm wide border for film transparency masking).

snip

Well, my god's bigger than yours, because he decreed 6 x 7 cm. to be the
nominal frame size.

rwalker, Mar 26, 2008
19. ### Michael GrayGuest

On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:53:16 -0700 (PDT), Don Stauffer in Minnesota
<> wrote:

>On Mar 25, 5:33 pm, John Locke <> wrote:
>> On 25 Mar 2008 22:09:57 -0000, large person <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Well "God" didn't make the human eye. Its a product of nature. And
>> at some point in time, nature will improve on it..unless of course man
>> does it first.

>
>
>We already have- binoculars, telescopes, etc. From now on humans
>control evolution (on THIS planet, anyway). Of course, although I am
>a retired physicist, I also think that God specified the laws of
>nature, so he/she indirectly, in a way, designed the eye

You were a physicist, yet you still believe in a bronze-age
superstition?
How can you support such blatant cognitive dissanance?

Michael Gray, Mar 26, 2008
20. ### ____Guest

In article <>,
Michael Gray <> wrote:
>
> You were a physicist, yet you still believe in a bronze-age
> superstition? How can you support such blatant cognitive dissanance?

Yes; its twits like you that do make a rough argument out of intelligent
design.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

____, Mar 27, 2008