Message-Id: <199706092327.QAA35492@dns.ccit.arizona.edu> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 09:35:19 +1000 From: Jennifer Brasher <mailto:J.Brasher@INS.GU.EDU.AU> Subject: Re: 4x6? 5x7? 8x10? To: mailto:IMAGELIB@LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Amazing,.. thanks George, didn't know about National Geographic printing from 35 mm slides! I had also been under the impression, like Robert, that for publishing 35mm were a bad bet. Quite a few variations about, unless, for top end publishing. Shall file this one away.Yes, I get the picture that analog has more info. as it is a wavy undulating line of information, allowing much more subtle gradation, as opposed to digital with its right-angled pitting process from binary code ( 1s and 0s). I wonder if they'll ever come up with fractal codes - speaking in total ignorance here! Jennifer.
>My didn't someone reveal his age! Yes an 8 x 10 inch contact print has
>more info in it than one could imagine coming from an 8 x 10 inch negative,
>but, think of what you'd have with an 11 x 14 inch negative. It'll be a
>very long time before a digital image will contain as much information as
>even a 35 mm negative. Just try projecting equal sizes and see who wins. I
>like to give my favorite reference when someone wants to know if a 35 mm
>slide is good enough for a publication: do you realize that almost all the
>images in the National Geographic are from 35 mm slides. If one is going to
>do serious research on a work of art -that is one thing- but if you are
>going to run a 2 column color plate and/or a web sizeof say 4 x 6 inch-that
>is another.
>
>But those 8 x 10 inch contacts were beautiful weren't they. When I retire I
>want to own an 8 x 10 inch camera even if i never use it!
>George
>
>>At 08:39 AM 6/6/97 +1000, J Brasher wrote:
>>>Better to scan from the negative - better still to scan from 4x5" negs, but
>>>35m still quite good. Jennifer
>>
>>Curious how things change. In my student days, 35mm negs were considered
>>unpublishable, 4x5 were okay for publications and 8x10 (and larger: 16x20s)
>>were considered reference prints. When you bought an 8x10 print from a
>>museum, more likely than not, it was a contact print.
>>
>>R.Baron
>>mailto:rabaron@pipeline.com
>
>
>George Holmes, MSGT/USAF-Ret
>Archer M Huntington Art Gallery
>The University of Texas
>23rd and San Jacinto St
>Austin, Tx 78712-1205
>Photographer-Site Designer
>Ph# 512.471.9194
>Fax# 512.471.7023
>http://www.utexas.edu/cofa/hag
>***********************I will not tolerate intolerance********************
VIEWS EXPRESSED MAY BE PERSONAL,NOT NECESSARILY UNIVERSITY POLICY. ******************************************************************************
Jennifer Brasher `` ` ` ` EMAIL: mailto:J.Brasher@ins.gu.edu.au QCA Library Slides/ Digital Images `` ` ` VOICE: +61 (07) 3875 3132
` ` ` ` ` FAX: +61 (07) 3875 3133 SNAIL MAIL ` ` ` ` Queensland College of Art Library ` ` ` ` * Griffith University ``````` *
Clearview Terrace ``*` * Morningside Campus * PO Box 84 Morningside Brisbane Queensland 4170 Australia ******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************