The Big Picture

Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
428
Location
Algonquin, IL
Very interesting, 2.6 gig files. I might have to upgrade my CF cards. Thanks for the link, I love seeing interesting items like this.

Ron
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Messages
1,148
Location
Clarksville, IN
nice story, looks like he is using standard aerial film which runs 9 1/2 inches wide by from anywhere from 125 to 550 feet in length. film cost run about 8 bucks per foot after processing. Our company ran approximnately 10,000 feet of it this year doing standard aerial work.

All these were scanned at 1600 dpi (ability to go to 3200) and stored on raids built by Patrick and GigaParts. with jpg tif compression each color image comes out at about 100 meg. That's manageable considering the number of them we have to work with.

think about his format. he is starting with an image that is roughly 10 times larger than 35mm. A 10x enlargement from 35mm barely makes it to 11 x 14 while an equivelant enlargement factor of 8x gets us almost 8 feet. The result is image quality as good as a 35mm 11 x 14 but it's wall size.

He's matched it up with a quality lens which really makes the difference. Aerial lenses are designed for geometric accuracy and not sharpness. unfortunate but a function of the glass.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
4,455
Location
CT USA
The lens didn't look like an aerial lens to me, looked more like a standard large format lens, which are not as sharp as 35mm lenses, but they don't need to be. I agree, take a 8x10 or 11x14 view camera original and scan it on a high quality scanner and you will see detail everywhere.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom