Re: why do idiots bother with film anymore?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by John Horner, Apr 12, 2004.

  1. John Horner

    John Horner Guest


    > Given the aspect ratio of centerfolds (very tall), how is that done
    > exactly? A very anamorphic lens, or is it really more like a 3-4" X 10"
    > exposed negative? Or three shots stiched together at the page barriers?


    With an 8" x 10" film original it really is not a problem to crop as needed
    to fit into a particular form factor. So what if you "only" end up using 6"
    x 10" of the film area. I wonder how many gigapixels that translates to?

    John
     
    John Horner, Apr 12, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Horner

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <> on Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:50:14 -0700,
    "John Horner" <> wrote:

    >> Given the aspect ratio of centerfolds (very tall), how is that done
    >> exactly? A very anamorphic lens, or is it really more like a 3-4" X 10"
    >> exposed negative? Or three shots stiched together at the page barriers?

    >
    >With an 8" x 10" film original it really is not a problem to crop as needed
    >to fit into a particular form factor. So what if you "only" end up using 6"
    >x 10" of the film area. I wonder how many gigapixels that translates to?


    Only about 300-600 megapixels.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas
    [PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
    <http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]
     
    John Navas, Apr 12, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. John Horner

    John Horner Guest

    "John Navas" <> wrote in message
    news:0wpec.5162$...
    > I wonder how many gigapixels that translates to?
    >
    > Only about 300-600 megapixels.



    Ok, call it half a gigapixel then ... still much higher than any digital
    camera one can expect to see for under $10,000 in the next five years.

    John
     
    John Horner, Apr 12, 2004
    #3
  4. John Horner

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <> on Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:46:49 -0700,
    "John Horner" <> wrote:

    >"John Navas" <> wrote in message
    >news:0wpec.5162$...
    >> I wonder how many gigapixels that translates to?
    >>
    >> Only about 300-600 megapixels.

    >
    >Ok, call it half a gigapixel then ... still much higher than any digital
    >camera one can expect to see for under $10,000 in the next five years.


    True, but then I'm not about to lug around an 8x10 view camera. ;-)

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas
    [PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
    <http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]
     
    John Navas, Apr 14, 2004
    #4
  5. John Horner

    Nick Zentena Guest

    John Navas <> wrote:
    > [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <> on Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:46:49 -0700,
    > "John Horner" <> wrote:
    >
    >>"John Navas" <> wrote in message
    >>news:0wpec.5162$...
    >>> I wonder how many gigapixels that translates to?
    >>>
    >>> Only about 300-600 megapixels.

    >>
    >>Ok, call it half a gigapixel then ... still much higher than any digital
    >>camera one can expect to see for under $10,000 in the next five years.

    >
    > True, but then I'm not about to lug around an 8x10 view camera. ;-)
    >


    Ya pocket cameras like that just aren't worth the effort. You need to go
    at least 11x14 before it can be called a real camera.

    Nick
     
    Nick Zentena, Apr 14, 2004
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. joevan

    MSN Video, useless, won't work, why bother

    joevan, Apr 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,905
    joevan
    Apr 5, 2004
  2. BIG NIGE

    Why bother with New Windows Vista

    BIG NIGE, Jul 28, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    616
    Blinky the Shark
    Jul 29, 2005
  3. none

    why do companies bother with 'doubleclick'? i

    none, Oct 11, 2006, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    435
  4. Pattern-chaser

    Panasonic FZ20 - why bother?

    Pattern-chaser, Dec 20, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    406
    Hans-Georg Michna
    Dec 30, 2004
  5. Frosty

    Wireless network security-Why bother?

    Frosty, Feb 7, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    764
    Walter Mautner
    Feb 11, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page