8x10 and larger cameras should hold up even better.
tOM
On 30 Jul 2005 at 13:16,
R. Jackson <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The rationale seems to be that digital is "good enough" to get the
> job done, as long as the job isn't held up to very intense scrutiny.
> I'm sure Ansel Adams would be proud... ;-)
>
> On Jul 30, 2005, at 1:14 PM, Earl Dunbar wrote:
>
> > My quick read was that for very large enlargements, the C@non
> > files broke down quite noticeably, and the 4x5 held up well.
-- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur --
,__@ tOM Trottier
_-\_<, 758 Albert St., Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8
(*)/'(*) N45.412 W75.714 +1 613 231-6115
Abacurial Information Architecture
-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
-- Type: text/plain
-- Desc: Attachment information.
-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
-- Type: Application/Octet-stream
-- File: tom-smallest.jpg
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|