Digital BW, The Print

The 20d can make files every bit a smooth as my 1D Mark II (sold the 
20d, 30d will be here next week and i still have the Mk II).

8 megapixels is plenty of resoution for a 2200 print. I shot a beach 
scene, which was part of a print exchange about a year ago. It was 
printed BO on a 4000 on glossy paper.

I showed a 12x18 print to a friend of mine who is an award winning B&W 
photographer. He only shoots 4x5 and MF film AND only prints in the 
darkroom.

He was blown away by my BO print and thinks it looks as good as 4x5 at 
that size......smooth and grainless. I don't understand why the 20d 
isn't doing it for you. You probably need to look at revising your 
workflow.

Claude

My students all use the 20D. I have seen a lot of these files in the
last year. The 5D is quite superior to the ID Mark 2 and certainly the
20D. I have a friend who is one of the most experienced and well
equipped ad photographers here in Atlanta. He is getting rid of his ID
M2 to buy a second 5D. The reduction of noise alone outclasses these
earlier Canon slrs. The larger view finder, the larger file size, the
full frame capability make this the camera of the hour. Of course the
hour changes every year. But for 3 grand it is a very fine piece of
equipment as long as you don't need really big prints.

John




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, claudej1@... wrote:

>
> The 20d can make files every bit a smooth as my 1D Mark II (sold the 
> 20d, 30d will be here next week and i still have the Mk II).
> 
> 8 megapixels is plenty of resoution for a 2200 print. I shot a beach 
> scene, which was part of a print exchange about a year ago. It was 
> printed BO on a 4000 on glossy paper.
> 
> I showed a 12x18 print to a friend of mine who is an award winning B&W 
> photographer. He only shoots 4x5 and MF film AND only prints in the 
> darkroom.
> 
> He was blown away by my BO print and thinks it looks as good as 4x5 at 
> that size......smooth and grainless. I don't understand why the 20d 
> isn't doing it for you. You probably need to look at revising your 
> workflow.
> 
> Claude
>

-> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, claudej1@ wrote:
> >
> > The 20d can make files every bit a smooth as my 1D Mark II (sold the 
> > 20d, 30d will be here next week and i still have the Mk II).
> > 
> > 8 megapixels is plenty of resoution for a 2200 print. I shot a beach 
> > scene, which was part of a print exchange about a year ago. It was 
> > printed BO on a 4000 on glossy paper.
> > 
> > >
>


In all these discussions, there is no mention of the impact of the lens on the printing 
resolution,  For the example Canon 8 mega pixels digitals with an "L" lens vs a Leica 8 
mega pixel, digital with Leica lenses.   Let's say both cameras printing 11 by 14 B&W 
prints, which camera would give you a better print?


Martin

Let's say both cameras printing 11 by 14 B&W 
> prints, which camera would give you a better print
> 



The discussion began about smoothness and Black Only printing...not 
"sharpness" or resolution.

The "smoothness" limitation of Black Only in little letter sized
prints has to do with the dot size of the printer, not the file size,
not the camera. 

As size increases, larger files will look smoother, but 12MP at 6X9
doesn't look much smoother than 3.2MP, when printed Black Only.