>>4369855cont from
>>4369975- You have ZERO valid objections to the headlight comparisons. I explicitly scaled the 5Ds image to the 6x9 scan's dimensions (minus border), then took equal sized crops from both. The film side is sharp, detailed, well exposed, professionally shot and scanned at 10,000 ppi fluid mounted on a reprographic scanning system proven to resolve at least 500 lp/mm (test chart scan is on their site). I don't think there's a better scanning setup any where in the world, literally. HXY scans out perform everything else, every drum, every home camera scanner setup, Imacons, all of it. Film just lost. I'm the one who should have objections to the comparison as the 5Ds was shot headlight at edge of frame at f/2.8 hand held on a zoom lens. On 6x9 the headlight was near center shot tripod mounted with a prime at optimum aperture. The 5Ds still won.
- When asked to circle in red the areas where you think film resolved more detail, you refuse. Why? Because you can't find them either.
- When asked to circle in red the areas where you think there's aliasing or a 'Bayer mess', you refuse. Why? Because you can't find them either.
- You betray your own thoughts by consistently screaming "film is better! BUT HERE'S THE EXCUSE WHY IT'S NOT!"
Oh, and you REFUSED TO ANSWER my questions about Adox, and we both know why. I'm ready to post another comparison, this time against 35mm Adox scanned at 24,110 ppi, proving that Serger's claims about Adox resolution in the real world are bullshit. Serger claims "oh noes film is limited even by a drum scanner" but the HXY scanner is PROVEN to exceed 500 lp/mm. They provide the evidence on their site, an actual downloadable scan of a test chart. Imagine that, posting evidence. You could learn a thing or two from
www.high-end-scans.de 