6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7, 6x8.....
What would/have would you use?
True, 6x7 is good for wet enlarging, it's a shame square paper isn't available pre cut
From the stand point of probably only using the image on-line etc.
It is from Ilford.
Steve.
If you are only using the image online then you may as well stick to 35mm. Or for that matter, use a 1 Mpixel digital camera.
I understand that scanning reduces the image to pixels, but I am 100% sure that a scanned film shot looks miles better than a shot from a digital P&S camera. Therefore my assumption that Steve's comment was in fact a joke![]()
I understand that scanning reduces the image to pixels, but I am 100% sure that a scanned film shot looks miles better than a shot from a digital P&S camera. Therefore my assumption that Steve's comment was in fact a joke![]()
I am wondering Ekimeno, why that will be correct if both the camera and the scanner uses same quality sensors and processing S/w ( and same size photo). Dont know the answer; but seems to me the result would be kind of similar.![]()
That last comment was a joke, right?![]()
Hi Steve, do you know where sells it though? The only one I could find listed was 10x10 vanilla MGRC, and ideally I want FB papers. It would be nice to print and not have to trim everything down to square and risk ruining it with my hamfisted cutting![]()
No.
If you are only going to use an image on a web page, why would you need any more resolution than the page requires?
My comment was really a continuation of a comment I made in another thread about printing your images. About 85% of respondants stated that they only ever viewed their images on their monitors or digital frames. I thought it was funny that it was probably the same group of people who are always eager to get the new, increased resolution cameras as they become available.
Steve.