Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Digital trends (Very LONG)

Subject: Re: [OM] Digital trends (Very LONG)
From: Richard Schaetzl <Richard.Schaetzl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 15:18:27 +0100
Sorry for the delayed reply.

"C.H.Ling" wrote:
> 
> Richard Schaetzl wrote:

> > That are non continuous tone printer, they dither the image and usual
> > the resolution is not very high.
> >
> 
> Yes, I think their resolution is from 300dpi to 1200dpi, but who need
> high dip for such big prints? You have to see the whole picture at
> least 20 feet away!

Yeah, but these printers main feature is to print in big size, not
photographic quality, while the Durst Lambda is a large size
photographic printer/enlarger.

> > The difference between Durst Lambda and inkjet printer is the better
> > quality of the Durst. The Lambda as continuous tone device is able to
> > produce highest resolution prints with exceptional smooth colour and
> > grey gradients, like one is used from conventional prints on
> > photographic paper.
> >
> 
> Okay it could be a great printer, but you can also check some good
> quality magazines, they are comparable to traditional photos. Some
> Japanese photo magazines I have seen were really stunning. If you have
> some Fuji film catalogues you will also know. They are all not
> continuous tone prints.

There are Duotone, Tritone, Hificolor printing (printing press)
technologies for best printing of continuous tone images. Prints and
books made with this conventional printing press technologies can look
really good, but I never seen one coming close to the original
photographic quality. Every time I visited an exhibition I noticed how
much better an photographic print looks. Better blacks and clear
whites, excellent tonality. An example of very poor printing quality
are most books with photos of Andreas Feininger, muddy greys and
unsharp prints. I was pleasant surprised when I could see the
photographic originals, sharp, contrasty images.

> Usually large format output don't need high dip, consider a 4x5 slide
> scan a 3000dpi (already much exceeded the 4x5 lens resolution), it is
> 12,000x15,000 pixel. Output to 120 x150 inch need only 100dpi
> (continue tone of course).

Pure theory, every body can see the pixels/dots in an 100 dpi print,
for representation of continuous tone images with an half tone printer
one needs a much higher printing resolution than the initially wanted
practical resolution.

Users of an Linhof, Fuji 6x17 or Seitz 360° panoramic camera might
want "enlargers" like the Durst Lambda, because it gives them the
opportunity to enlarge their negative in unusual aspect ratios and
sizes. Panoramic photos show a lot of small details and are normally
scrutinized from a much closer distance than "conventional" photos of
that size, this is when photographic quality rules and printing press
technology fails. 


> > I think part of the success I had with digital mini labs, is owed to
> > the fact that those mini labs were able to use embedded profiles.
> >
> 
> I'm completely lost here, I didn't know how the embedded color
> profiles work.

The profile basically tell what RGB colour value is related to what
real life colour.

> Is that mean you need a monitor that is calibrated to
> the profile,

If one want to evaluate the result on the monitor, yes.

> consider a gray shade of any value (80,80,80;
> 120,102,120....) should the printer produce a true gray ? If yes, is
> the color profiles only a contrast profile?

Contrast and colour value.

> If not, how the grachic
> design work with drawing program ? believe the monitor and his eyes or
> the data value?

Graphic designer often use real colour swatches and often take the
colours shown on their monitor as rough estimations.

> > ........
> > D1 has worse colours and resolution is lower than much cheaper Olympus
> > consumer DC.
> >
> 
> I have no experience on D1 but seen some test photos, seems not that
> bad.

Has been discussed in de.rec.fotografie some samples were shown on web
sites and I got the impression Nikon has admitted that colour accuracy
was not their prime design goal.


> Sorry, Canon EOS1n RS only shot 10fps, don't know which Kodak

AFAIK Canon F1HS (introduced at Lake Placid Olympics) was faster.

> traditional camera can do 25fps. I was talking about traditional film
> camera not digital.

Kodak produces very expensive high speed digital cameras for the
recording of events like crash tests. Any traditional film, movie
camera can record 25 fps or higher, they are available from small
size  to standard 35 mm and gigantic Imax film cameras.
 
> I will love to have a DC than can shot 15fps or more, for action
> shoots or flying birds I don't have to care about timing, just
> tracking for the subject with shutter release depressed, then select
> the best to keep, no charge!

How big is the memory ($) of a digital camera which can make 15 fps at
what quality, resolution, over what time span?

AFAIK the CCD does limit the fps an digital camera can record, as
higher the resolution as slower the fps. The  final recording will be
_much_ slower, less than 1 fps, because recording media's used in
normal digital cameras are slow.


Best regards

Richard


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz