Medium format back prices ludicrous

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by RichA, Jan 25, 2011.

  1. RichA

    Savageduck Guest

    It isn't already?

    Well I thought creating a verb from a noun, a sort of inverse gerund
    might have been the way to go. :)
    Still a non-word though, created for this thread.

    That said, creation of a large image by use of a mosaic pattern is the
    technique used by Gigapan to create their massive images. Not all of
    those are panoramas. Gigapan can use to shoot multiple images of a
    large subject to be stitched together to form a 1:1 image, or
    enlargement for a billboard, or similar use.

    The various uses of "mosaic" in digital have been explored in the SI by
    Troy Piggins and some others.

    I have been playing with a Mac program for creating tiled mosaic
    renditions of JPEGs, "MacOSaix" < >

    This is not what is being talked about here.

    Just a little bit of entertaining fun.
    Savageduck, Jan 28, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    John A. Guest

    You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it
    John A., Jan 28, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    bugbear Guest

    Most large prints are done at lower print resolutions.

    bugbear, Jan 28, 2011
  4. RichA

    bugbear Guest

    Not on a fashion shoot, there isn't!

    bugbear, Jan 28, 2011
  5. RichA

    bugbear Guest

    I think you're confusing capitalism's tendancy
    towards monopoly with communism.

    bugbear, Jan 28, 2011
  6. RichA

    Hans Kruse Guest

    Yes, you are right it is a very high price. Every vendor has the right
    to set his own prices. The Phase One folks knows this market segment
    better than anybody, so I'm sure they will sell well. After some time
    the price goes down. It's the same with high-end DSLR's.
    Hans Kruse, Jan 28, 2011
  7. There is no owning of software. You purchase a license to use it, you never
    own it.
    Pete Stavrakoglou, Jan 28, 2011
  8. RichA

    peter Guest

    Get thee to a course in economics 101.
    Learn about economic systems and most importantly, learn the difference
    between communism, socialism and capitalism.
    Also, take marketing 101 and business processes 101.
    Come back in no less than a year and report.
    peter, Jan 28, 2011
  9. Actually the resolution of most outdoor graphics is much lower than 300
    dpi. They are closer to 90 or usually less so your MP are going a much
    longer distance.
    savantcreative, Jan 28, 2011
  10. RichA

    George Kerby Guest

    With his ADHD? Are you kidding, he couldn't stay on subject any more than a
    couple of hours - MAX!
    George Kerby, Jan 28, 2011
  11. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    They were the best pixels available at the time. Wet scanning yields
    cleaner scans. There is a tray kit for the Nikon 9000D for wet scanning
    but I've been reluctant to get into that.
    Alan Browne, Jan 28, 2011
  12. RichA

    shiva das Guest

    Even assuming you are correct on the resolution, a 20' x 24' billboard
    at 90dpi would be 560MP.
    shiva das, Jan 28, 2011
  13. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    Doesn't need to be that good.

    Imagine a billboard at some distance away that would look like a 5 x 6
    inch print held in your hands.

    All it needs is 1500 x 1200 "dots" on it.

    20' = 240" // 1500 / 240 = 6.25 dots per inch.

    It would look pretty coarse to those putting it up - but from the road
    just like a postcard.

    I don't know what actual screen they use for large billboards - but I'd
    bet a lot of it is just repeating neighbors.
    Alan Browne, Jan 28, 2011
  14. Well, no. The best pixels available at the time were dSLR pixels; you just
    didn't get enough of them to outdo the far larger number of pixels you get
    from scanning MF film.

    My point is very simply that comparing pixel counts isn't meaningful because
    the information quantity per pixel is lower in scans than in Bayer dSLR
    Only marginally. The problem isn't in the scan, it's in the film. It does
    make sense to scan with too many pixels, use wet mounting and the like to
    get the best you can. But there's no way you can make 645 produce better
    quality prints than the 5D2. And there's no way in hell you can make a
    snippet of a 4000 ppi film scan look as anywhere near as good as a snippet
    with the same number of pixels from any dSLR ever made.
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 29, 2011
  15. RichA

    shiva das Guest

    "At the time"? At _what_ time? 1999 for the Nikon D1? Drum scanners with
    photomultiplier tubes have been around since the National Bureau of
    Standards' model built in 1957.
    "One of the unique features of drum scanners is the ability to control
    sample area and aperture size independently. The sample size is the area
    that the scanner encoder reads to create an individual pixel. The
    aperture is the actual opening that allows light into the optical bench
    of the scanner. The ability to control aperture and sample size
    separately is particularly useful for smoothing film grain when scanning
    black-and white and color negative originals." --Wiki
    shiva das, Jan 29, 2011
  16. So? Drum scans are only slightly marginally better than Nikon 9000 scans, if

    Nikon 8000:
    Drum scan:

    Again, the problem isn't the scanner, it's the film. 4000 ppi scanned pixels
    are grody bad compared to dSLR pixels because there isn't that much
    information on the film. By the way, 5D2 pixels are almost exactly 4000 ppi
    at the sensor plane, and they look worlds better than that.

    See the "If film were perfect" samples. That's what _real_ pixels look like.
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 29, 2011
  17. RichA

    Allen Guest

    <snip all content>
    I don't know who the OP is (I would have to guess a certain Canadian
    whose first name hardly fits his many posts about prices) but I have 2
    suggestions for him/her/it:

    1. If it's too expensive DON'T BUY IT.
    2. Kwichyerbitchin.

    Allen, Jan 29, 2011
  18. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    : $
    : > On 1/25/2011 12:37 AM, RichA wrote:
    : >> The price of an entry-level car? 4000lbs of steel, plastic, aluminum,
    : >> electronics, base metals, rubber, etc., the same as a 1.5lb piece of
    : >> electronics?. Pure insanity. Those things aren't radiation-hardened
    : >> and going into space, so is it solely the R&D and the sensor being
    : >> paid for here? It certainly isn't the $10-$20 worth of electronics or
    : >> the LCD screen...
    : >>
    : >> Luminous Landscape
    : >>
    : >> Pricing, Availability and Other News
    : >>
    : >> Phase 80MP back.
    : >> The IQ180 back will start to ship in late April, 2011. The IQ160
    : >> and IQ140 will become available over the following couple of months.
    : >>
    : >> The IQ180 will be priced at US $43,990.
    : >
    : > So if you see a price vacuum, fill it. That's the capitalist system.
    : > To constantly carp how some mysterious corporation is overcharging,
    : > is pure communist propaganda.
    : Honestly? I think cameras like it and a lot of other things today ARE
    : communist, because they want to force people into the renter's market
    : and not the owner's market. Look at Microsoft trying to force everyone
    : to cloud computing, no more ownership of software. Look at movies,
    : moving away from owned copies like DVD and Blu-Ray to streamed movies
    : from services. All control in the hands of others. It is ALL a form
    : of communism.

    Your definition of "communism" is so broad that it would have made Joseph
    McCarthy laugh. What you call communism, the Soviet Union habitually referred
    to as decadent bourgeois CAPITALISM.

    Robert Coe, Jan 29, 2011
  19. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    No DSLR pixels were better than a 6x6 cm slide in 2000.
    Alan Browne, Jan 29, 2011
  20. Are you being purposely dense? My point remains that on a _per pixel basis_,
    4000 ppi scans are crap .

    Why is that so hard to understand?

    Print a 900 x 900 snippet of a 4000 ppi scan at 300 ppi. Print a 600 x 600
    snippet dSLR image at 200 ppi. Same size print, many fewer dSLR pixels, dSLR
    print looks way better.
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 30, 2011
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.