Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / Digital Photo / May 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

A slightly different question.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Ian - 31 May 2005 13:06 GMT
I've read dozens of digital versus conventional versus human eye...
questions, and they've all just collapsed into ranting.

Therefore I have a slightly different question.

How big can you blow up a 6 megapixel raw image of a watercolour, on
perfect paper (3000 * 2000) before the 5% of people with the best eyes
can tell through the glass, that it's a print?
David J Taylor - 31 May 2005 14:03 GMT
> I've read dozens of digital versus conventional versus human eye...
> questions, and they've all just collapsed into ranting.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> perfect paper (3000 * 2000) before the 5% of people with the best eyes
> can tell through the glass, that it's a print?

Sounds like a nice topic for someone's MSc thesis!
Jim - 31 May 2005 16:47 GMT
> I've read dozens of digital versus conventional versus human eye...
> questions, and they've all just collapsed into ranting.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> perfect paper (3000 * 2000) before the 5% of people with the best eyes
> can tell through the glass, that it's a print?

Interesting question.  However, how it looks to me is the only thing that
matters to me.
Jim
bmoag - 31 May 2005 18:17 GMT
Ever watch "Antiques Roadshow"?
People who know what they are looking at will likely be able to tell from a
close inspection, regardless of size. There are many people in different
professions, not merely antique vendors, who do this kind of thing for a
living.
That doesn't mean they are always correct in their judgments, however.
tomm101 - 31 May 2005 19:13 GMT
Anyone worth anything will be able to tell an original painting from an
inkjet, even on the same paper. Prints just look different, the way the
colors merge, may require close inspection but the difference is there.
There are legit artists who sell prints to have lower priced versions
of their oringinals. Most artists I've seen the prints are the same
size or smaller than the originals. The 3000x2000 pixel frame limits
sizes somewhat. I have printed 16x20 from the same size watercolor, I
have done 20x24 prints from 6mp photos with decent results. With a
really good image, very sharp, even tonality you may be able to go
larger. The Museum of Finearts in Boston is selling prints from the
paintings in it's collection. They use a 300mb image from a scanning
back on a 4x5 camera and print on Epson Smooth Fine Art paper lighting
the paining to maximize both tonality and texture, printing on an Epson
9600. The work is incredible but it is definitly a print.

Tom
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.