Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 28th Apr 2012 17:19 UTC
Permalink for comment 516943
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
Not even that: a technically high MP file from, say, a phone camera and its very small sensor & poor optics (poor "optical resolution" of sorts) ...will tend to give worse large prints than a proper DSLR with, say, nominally only half MP.
Probably more than A4 - I remember one informal experiment with three poster-sized prints of the same photograph, in 15, 10 and 5 MP versions (and A4 to poster increase is proportionally larger than 3 to 5 MP). IIRC, out of dozens of people, only one could pinpoint the difference ...probably due to being a pro in the field.
(I'd have to search for it myself, and I'm afraid ATM of wiki/google effect
PS. Kinda like megahertz myth of old days...
Edited 2012-05-03 21:04 UTC