Typical print resolutions for MF? Just curious

[Rurouni]

Hi, first time posting int he MF forums, its an area that I have seldom ventured, my only experience being shooting a roll of 120film on an old Seagull

I'm just wondering, to make a large print, say around 12 foot by 12 foot, is medium or large format still the only way to go or have the latest gen of SLRs been able to reach such sizes and resolutions?

Sorry if the questions sound a little noobie, was just wondering after looking at some very large prints recently. Thanks!

[alternatve]

Originally Posted by Rurouni Hi, first time posting int he MF forums, its an area that I have seldom ventured, my only experience being shooting a roll of 120film on an old Seagull I'm just wondering, to make a large print, say around 12 foot by 12 foot, is medium or large format still the only way to go or have the latest gen of SLRs been able to reach such sizes and resolutions? Sorry if the questions sound a little noobie, was just wondering after looking at some very large prints recently. Thanks!

Hey,

In my limited experience, the larger "sensor" size of the film wins even full frame DSLRs with 20+ MP. Even the smallest MF, 6x4.5 is around three times bigger then 35mm and it's a fact that the lesser you enlarge an image, the better it is.

Plus, the lens on your Seagull is a old triplet. Most other LF and MF lenses lose out in resolution to 35mm lenses, but as you have already seen, the pictures are the equal of, if not better then digital shots.

However, printing large isn't very convenient, and many labs convert the pictures to digital format before printing, using poor quality scanners which lower the quality of film. I still believe that LF and MF film beats digital cameras in quality, if not convenience.

Samuel

[pai]

Originally Posted by Rurouni to make a large print, say around 12 foot by 12 foot

12 inch or 12 foot? if 12 foot, even medium format won't save you....

[Rurouni]

Actually I was referring to 12foot. I walked by a giant poster on a wall that looked good and was wondering what sort of negative the person was working with.

Yeah I do appreciate the resolution of film and slide film still, that's why I still keep all my film gear, just that recently have been shooting mainly with digital, its just cheaper and more instantaneous heh :P

[alternatve]

If you can find a place to handle your print, and a drum scanner to scan in your negs/transparencies at the highest quality, I don't see why film will lose out, quality wise. You might want to start looking towards 4x5 or even 8x10 though.

Samuel

[Rurouni]

Its mainly just the cost and the lack of instant gratification I guess. But yeah.. perhaps I can start going into MF in a couple of yrs when perhaps MF would have an entry level digital back