100MP camera!

http://newsfromrussia.com/science/2005/11/24/68449.html

"Bolshoy Huy" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://newsfromrussia.com/science/2005/11/24/68449.html

"Although it takes 4 hours to take a picture and only works in red light, it
also delivers extremely high resolution."

Typical Russian technology. Takes way too long, requires politically correct
light, then lies about the outcome.

Lorem Ipsum wrote:
"Bolshoy Huy" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://newsfromrussia.com/science/2005/11/24/68449.html


"Although it takes 4 hours to take a picture and only works in red light, it
also delivers extremely high resolution."

Typical Russian technology. Takes way too long, requires politically correct
light, then lies about the outcome.



And I always thought the that University of California was in the USA

Angus

"angusinalberta" wrote in message
news:6JVxf.214414$2k.186535@pd7tw1no...
Lorem Ipsum wrote:
"Bolshoy Huy" wrote in message
oups.com...

http://newsfromrussia.com/science/2005/11/24/68449.html


"Although it takes 4 hours to take a picture and only works in red light,
it also delivers extremely high resolution."

Typical Russian technology. Takes way too long, requires politically
correct light, then lies about the outcome.



And I always thought the that University of California was in the USA

I like what is says at the bottom of the page under the heading: Photo
Gallery:

.. Angelina Jolie: No longer single

If Angus had read the story and gone to the link "photography," he would
have known that the story in Pravda hadn't claimed the experiment was done
in Russia. California scientists used the camera that a Russian had
invented.

In article ,
"Lorem Ipsum" wrote:

"Bolshoy Huy" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://newsfromrussia.com/science/2005/11/24/68449.html

"Although it takes 4 hours to take a picture and only works in red light, it
also delivers extremely high resolution."

Typical Russian technology. Takes way too long, requires politically correct
light, then lies about the outcome.

People with scan-backs are now thinking that they have pretty damn fast
cameras.

MB wrote:
If Angus had read the story and gone to the link "photography," he would
have known that the story in Pravda hadn't claimed the experiment was done
in Russia. California scientists used the camera that a Russian had
invented.


I guess I'll just have to continue using my 200+ MPixel
cameras (Large format view cameras).

Roger
Large format images at:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...y.large_format

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
], who wrote in article :
I guess I'll just have to continue using my 200+ MPixel
cameras (Large format view cameras).

Get your dimensions right. I expect your LF cameras provide about 25
MPixel/inch^2 max; actually, I would expect the useful value to be
closer to 6... Way short of 100 (but note that the MTF curve of the
sensor is suspiciously missing from the short review ;-)...

However, getting LF lenses which can usefully resolve 200 cycles/mm
would be a hard exercise. ;-)

Hope this helps,
Ilya

Ilya Zakharevich wrote:

[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
], who wrote in article :

I guess I'll just have to continue using my 200+ MPixel
cameras (Large format view cameras).


Get your dimensions right. I expect your LF cameras provide about 25
MPixel/inch^2 max; actually, I would expect the useful value to be
closer to 6... Way short of 100 (but note that the MTF curve of the
sensor is suspiciously missing from the short review ;-)...

However, getting LF lenses which can usefully resolve 200 cycles/mm
would be a hard exercise. ;-)

Hope this helps,
Ilya

Ilya,

Hmmm. So, Large format 4x5 film = 3.8x4.8x6 MP is less than
100? 8x10 film = 7.6 x 9.6 * 6MP is less than 100?

I get ~12 MP/sq inch from my systems.
4x5 film: 200 MP
8x10 film: ~ 600 to 1000 MP.

For those unfamiliar with my work, you can check it out at:
http://www.clarkvision.com

Large format versus other film sizes and types are documented at:
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/scandetail.html
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...digital.1.html
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta....summary1.html

I have tested using top of the line Linotype-Hell, Heidelberg Tango
scanner capable of 11,000 dpi, and run tests up to 11,000 dpi.
I stand by my results. But if you have information on how
to get 25 megapixels/sq inch from Fujichrome Velvia, I would
like to see it. I get consistently up to 12 megapixels/sq inch.

Roger

On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:44:49 -0700, "Roger N. Clark (change username
to rnclark)" wrote:

MB wrote:
If Angus had read the story and gone to the link "photography," he would
have known that the story in Pravda hadn't claimed the experiment was done
in Russia. California scientists used the camera that a Russian had
invented.


I guess I'll just have to continue using my 200+ MPixel
cameras (Large format view cameras).

Roger
Large format images at:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...y.large_format

Aside from resolved detail, what else makes large format images
look so much better (even with modest enlargement) than images
from smaller formats?
I remember thinking that even reproduced in a book in relatively good
quality reproduction (Ansel Adams three book set), LF images still
looked better than 35mm and medium format images.
-Rich