The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Support GetDPI.com with a action web converter.

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Hi Woody,

I'm not sure what set you have, but they were last updated in early 2009. THey now include separate sets for higher rez MF backs, as well as a refined set for cameras under 20MP.
 

kuau

Workshop Member
Hey Jack,
Am I entitled to a copy of your PS action? I was on the the Norther AZ workshop in 2009 with Guy, I think you couldn't make that one for some reason.

Steven
 

dick

New member
Hi Woody,

I'm not sure what set you have, but they were last updated in early 2009. They now include separate sets for higher rez MF backs, as well as a refined set for cameras under 20MP.
Got mine and it works, thanks, Jack.

By "Higher Res" do you mean over 20Mpx? I thought Higher res was over 60Mpx... or would it not make any difference to the optimization?

If there is a line 2 pixels wide (e.g. a hair) and you down-rez 60Mpx to 1Mpx, will the line still visible? and how?

Pictures look sharp if there is enough res to resolve the detail in the picture - so, with some scenes MF might not look much better (or resolve any more detail) than 35mm ff?
 
Last edited:

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Higher Res means over 20MP as far as the action set is concerned. So far it works well with 22MP through 60MP files. It worked fine with the Phase IQ180 demo files we had as well.

As to your second question, the answer is "it depends." Often, that 1 or 2 pixel line will remain as a 1 pixel line if there is enough contrast in the original file. If not, it may disappear.

Finally, if somebody is only shooting for web output, then yes, MF file size is probably overkill. However, the minute you start talking print output, the more native resolution the better.
 

dick

New member
Camera for web output

Finally, if somebody is only shooting for web output, then yes, MF file size is probably overkill. However, the minute you start talking print output, the more native resolution the better.
My theory is that, if you use any digital other than MF for 1Mpx output you need to downs res by a factor 9 to eliminate the effect of the Anti-aliasing filter (which spreads the light destined for one pixel over all the adjacent pixels), and then you have to down-res by a factor of 4 to eliminate the effect of Bayer interpolation, so a Full-format Canikon 35mm camera would have to be 36 Mpx to produces a "perfect" 1Mpx file?
 

dick

New member
Local sharpening before downsizing for web?

Got mine and it works, thanks, Jack.
If there is a line 2 pixels wide (e.g. a hair) and you down-rez 60Mpx to 1Mpx, will the line still visible? and how?
...Often, that 1 or 2 pixel line will remain as a 1 pixel line if there is enough contrast in the original file. If not, it may disappear.
This might indicate that local contrast enhancement on the raw file (Clarity in Phocus) might help?
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Hi Rem,

Yes, "John" is my given name, Jack is a nickname. Your actions should be in your inbox right now!
 
Top