Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tashley

Friday. Time for an outrageous comparison.

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You lost me from this mess when you uprezed, sharpened and had some third party scan. Not a valid comparison.

 

I know. Outrageous, isn't it...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great thread!.............But scanning ... boy, what a can of slippery random-motion worms that is. So operator dependent. I'd say the thing to do there is buy the best scanner you can afford and spend the time .....

 

....it's all colorful and puts up a good pretense of detail.... [the Canon]....looks not-quite real, somehow. Especially the texture....

 

Kent - I agree. I got that sense about the Canon file too. 'Not quite real' seems a good description.

 

As I suggested earlier; when buying a scan [unless you buy another one elsewhere for comparison] you may have no idea how far from optimum quality the scan is. Scan-monkey inadequacy and file tinkering can play havoc with the quality of the resultant file. Tim deserves high quality, I too can see him begrudging scanning fees and ending up controlling the scanning himself, [and like all normal people - hating every damned minute]. Happy days. Happy days.

 

................ Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get some of these comments. First, he is clearly a good photographer, second he made a reasonable attempt to equalize the processing on the images and while it wasn't a scientific exercise, the fact is that after processing by a reasonably skilled individual the Canon shot came out better for a large scaled image. I see no point in trying to diminish the facts by making statements like the Canon image doesn't look real. Well the other images look far less 'real' unless you have bad eyesight. This in no way diminishes that the M8 can and does produce some excellent files under the right conditions, in fact better than its 10 MP gives it a right to have. I suppose if you had enough time and put enough effort into it you might get a file that uprez'd sufficiently to match the Canon shot but why would you bother if you could just take the Canon shot and be done with it? Good and interesting comparison and if it is repeatable, then you know what to do to get the job done.

(I still prefer the size of the M8 to the Canon)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't get some of these comments. First, he is clearly a good photographer, second he made a reasonable attempt to equalize the processing on the images and while it wasn't a scientific exercise, the fact is that after processing by a reasonably skilled individual the Canon shot came out better for a large scaled image. I see no point in trying to diminish the facts by making statements like the Canon image doesn't look real. Well the other images look far less 'real' unless you have bad eyesight.

 

I beg your pardon?

"Diminish the facts"? " ... the other images look less real unless you have bad eyesight"?

 

My opinion about the Canon image is my opinion, and it stands as such.

 

You are trying to present your _opinion_, which you are welcome to, as fact while stating unequivocally that anyone who disagrees has bad eyesight.

 

Personally I'd much rather have bad eyesight than a bad attitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ok, I'll accept that to you blurry soft images look more real than sharply focused ones. They don't to me, even without my glasses

You are right..my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which "looks more real" is subjective and subject to opinion and interpretation. But the Canon and Wista have more resolution -- that's factual and can be measured. The comparison photos show the difference, and that's not at all surprising. I don't see any problem with any of the photos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I just finished teaching a class to medical students on this subject, I can't resist saying this Tim, please take it in context. But the M8 shot is a great example of a "negative" placebo response. People do get serious side effects from placebos as well as benefits. Expectation and matter are codependent. best....Peter

 

...a gentle dig at your delicious quote

expectation and matter, with ref. to the m8 and users become independent:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim - after much analysis, some algorithmic tests and bicubic computation, I think I've pinpointed the precise part of your test which is the problem for the critics on the forum:

 

the M8 didn't win.

 

best!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tim - after much analysis, some algorithmic tests and bicubic computation, I think I've pinpointed the precise part of your test which is the problem for the critics on the forum:

 

the M8 didn't win.

 

best!

 

I think I'd already extrapolated that one before I posted!

 

Today I will, horror of horrors, set the might 50 Lux and M8 against the Canon. Just to pitch the very best Leica setup I can muster against the gorilla. Stand by...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a wildly interesting comparison once between a bicycle, a Porsche, and a 20 ton truck. It's a pity I can't remember which came out best...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read a wildly interesting comparison once between a bicycle, a Porsche, and a 20 ton truck. It's a pity I can't remember which came out best...

 

Did any of them float?

 

;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, I'll accept that to you blurry soft images look more real than sharply focused ones. They don't to me, even without my glasses You are right..my opinion.

 

Without my glasses, all these images look the same. They are portraits of Tim's dog, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really can't see. You can't tell the difference between a cat and a dog?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read a wildly interesting comparison once between a bicycle, a Porsche, and a 20 ton truck. It's a pity I can't remember which came out best...

 

Yeah, but you don't spend $5000 on a bike...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark, I think we can all agree it's the strong sunlight in the Canon shot that makes the holes visible.

 

But that doesn't explain why the weave of the blue nylon rope has completely disappeared in the M8 shot. I'm really surprised by this.

 

I'd still be interested in seeing a crop of the same area without the uprezzing, just to see what information was there before processing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You really can't see. You can't tell the difference between a cat and a dog?

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy