![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
warehouse SECCS
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: SoCal...
Posts: 6,253
Car: 04 Evo 99 Cadillac
Class: street de le mod
|
![]()
__________________
Anjali? Anjali? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Seņor Cheap Bastarde
Real Name: Dean Join Date: May 2003
Location: $99 Tire Store
Posts: 9,294
Car: $.04 STI
Class: Fast,Cheap & Reliable=STI
Deal, did somebody say Deal? Oh, Dean, yeah that's me.
|
![]()
That's cool. I wonder if the picture will be exhibited somewhere out here...
__________________
I am a Commodore PET --- Now get off my lawn you kids... ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
EJ22
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Minden, NV
Posts: 144
|
![]()
They said the file size was 2.6 GB. That would actually be about 867 Megapixels at 24-bit or 650 MP at 32-bit (it's probably 24-bit). Still incredible.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
warehouse SECCS
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: SoCal...
Posts: 6,253
Car: 04 Evo 99 Cadillac
Class: street de le mod
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
Anjali? Anjali? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
EJ22
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Roseville, CA
Posts: 380
|
![]()
I saw some of Andreas Gursky's large scale photos at the SF MOMA last year ( http://www.moma.org/exhibitions/2001/gursky/ ), which are like 8x10 foot printed photos using like 5" negatives I believe. I was really disapointed how when you got closer to the work (like within 3-4 feet) you could see how poor the image resolution was.
I'd really like to see some of the results from this camera especially if the detail is as good as they say it is! :shock:
__________________
K-man |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|