So, I heard that film is about 16MP equilivant?

Discussion in 'Film Discussion and Q & A' started by prodigy2k7, Jul 21, 2008.

  1. prodigy2k7

    prodigy2k7 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    1,665
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    California, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    What is the MP equilivant for film? Also how many dots per inch is on a piece of film?
     
  2. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,817
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    There are too many variables to directly compare a MP number to film. I did read an article, a few years ago, where the magazine staff (Pop Photo, I think) did several tests to compare the Canon 1Ds (or maybe the mark II) to 35mm film (Kodak 100, I forget the specific type/name). At that point, they concluded that the Canon was better, over all.

    As for your other question...I don't know. I don't think it's that easy.
     
  3. compur

    compur No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,721
    Likes Received:
    399
    Location:
    L.A.
    This film claims it is equivalent to 500 MP.
     
  4. elemental

    elemental TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    Messages:
    646
    Likes Received:
    3
    When you say "film," do you mean 35mm?

    What determines the working digital resolution of scanned negatives is (at least for now) often the resolution of the scanner, if you want a literal translation from film into digital. Also remember that there are many different film formats- smaller negatives like 110 have the lowest resolution and are the least enlargement friendly, while many large format films with their humongous negatives are often said to crush even the 22mp full-frame DSLRs in resolution (I wouldn't know firsthand).
     
  5. tasman

    tasman TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    468
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    I have heard that before too. 35mm film was the equivalent to 22 MP.
     
  6. reg

    reg TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,487
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Stuck inside of Mobile with the GTFO Blues Again
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    They crush even the 50MP medium format DSLRs. Nothing will ever compare with 8x10 film, short of an 8x10 or MAYBE a 4x5 digital camera.
     
  7. ksmattfish

    ksmattfish Now 100% DC - not as cool as I once was, but still

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2003
    Messages:
    7,021
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Currently available 4cm x 5cm digital sensors have greater resolution and dynamic range than 4x5 inch C41. Scanning backs that are significantly better than 8x10 film have been around for over 10 years, although they require very long exposures (10+ minutes) so they aren't practical in all situations. Professional digital studio cameras that surpass 8x10 film image quality with normal exposure times will be introduced within the next 10 years.

    I agree with the above posts that there are a lot of variables that make it difficult to generalize comparisons of image quality between film and digital, but a large majority of serious enthusiasts and professional photographers, including myself, are of the opinion that most 8 mp APS DSLRs match or beat 35mm film at ISO 100, and once you get to ISO 400 and beyond there is little comparison.
     
  8. nealjpage

    nealjpage multi format master in a film geek package

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,479
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Oregon
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Holy crap! Matt! Where have you been, bud?
     
  9. Jeff Canes

    Jeff Canes No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    6,190
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Hollywood, FLA USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Film and digital photography have different attitudes. Chose which one services your needs. As far as MP I agree with Matt[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
     
  10. Alpha

    Alpha Troll Extraordinaire

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    5,454
    Likes Received:
    41
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    If you're a meticulous film shooter, and you shoot slow, I would ballpark the native resolution of film at about 3000DPI, or higher in certain circumstances. From there you can do the math according to negative size.
     
  11. prodigy2k7

    prodigy2k7 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    1,665
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    California, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    So with film you can make a 100" long poster at 300 dpi?
     
  12. Jeff Canes

    Jeff Canes No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    6,190
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Hollywood, FLA USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    ^^^
    That is the viewing distant?
    Will the grain show?
    Will the film be scanned?
    How will it be printed?


    I have a few older 24x36” prints made from 35mm film, they look nice to me, yes a little grainy compare to today digital standards but still nice prints[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2008

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
20 mp photo
,
120
,
120 film scan
,
adox cms 20 4x5
,

adox cms ii 20

,
enlarged 35mm
,
how big can i blowup a 16mp photo
,
how big can i enlarge a 16mp picture?
,
how big will a 16mp photo blow up to be
,
how large print 16mp