131–140 of 166 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An 8" x 10" digital sensor would take a whole silicon wafer. Doubt you'll see one, ever.
The LargeSense LS911 features a single shot 9×11-inch monochrome CMOS sensor with a 75-micron pixel size, a high base sensitivity of ISO 2100, and a maximum sensitivity of ISO 6400. https://petapixel.com/2018/04/17/largesense-unveils-worlds-f...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An 8" x 10" digital sensor would take a whole silicon wafer. Doubt you'll see one, ever.
The LargeSense LS911 features a single shot 9×11-inch monochrome CMOS sensor with a 75-micron pixel size, a high base sensitivity of ISO 2100, and a maximum sensitivity of ISO 6400. https://petapixel.com/2018/04/17/largesense-unveils-worlds-f...
I've never run into any trouble getting film hand checked while traveling within the US. Sadly it's a completely different story internationally. Indian security has been the strictest in my experience -- flat out refusal to do anything other than run the film through the X-Ray machine. I don't travel with fast film (800+ ISO) anymore. It's just not worth the stress.
I decided to switch to digital for anything where I want to go over 400 ISO. My personal feelings are that the image quality of 800 ISO film is just terrible. YMMV based on personal preference, I know people who really like the look of fast film.
Genuine question: Why do people still use film anymore? I know some big movie studios do sometimes use it (The Hobbit comes to mind), but I don’t understand why anyone would use film when we have DSLRs that can have resolutions over 30 megapixels. EDIT: added “why” at beginning
Another point in film's favor is that it has extremely high resolution per dollar. I just bought a Rolleicord TLR camera, which shoots 6 cm square negatives. It cost me $250 on eBay. If shot with good quality low grain film, and scanned with a professional grade negative scanner, the equivalent resolution I get from it should be on the order of 100 megapixels, and possibly more in good lighting conditions. Even regul…
I've never run into any trouble getting film hand checked while traveling within the US. Sadly it's a completely different story internationally. Indian security has been the strictest in my experience -- flat out refusal to do anything other than run the film through the X-Ray machine. I don't travel with fast film (800+ ISO) anymore. It's just not worth the stress.
“Dear ,
Thank you for getting in touch with us about your journey through Heathrow Airport, we have received your feedback card and read it.
I can understand your concerns about taking film through security. We can confirm, however, that independent tests undertaken by the British Photographers' Liaison Committee (BPLC) to establish the detail of any potential damage to film caused by baggage screening machines at airports have given the all-clear to the current hand-luggage x-ray inspection systems installed at Heathrow.
These findings confirm that hand-luggage security scanning machinery is safe for all normal film types (up to and including ISO 400). Current digital camera storage media can also safely be examined by these x-ray machines without sustaining damage.
If you are carrying professional film rated ISO 800 or faster, you can request the film be searched by alternative means, as I understand you did. We will accommodate this where possible but this cannot be guaranteed. I am not sure if you were travelling with one, but for your future travels please bring any documentary proof of the film rating with you. Damages of film rated ISO 800, through scanners, have not being confirmed though.
We also recommend that you leave extra time to pass through security as additional screening requirements may be required.
Thank you again for taking the time to write to us, we have passed the feedback to the relevant team for their review. I hope you will have a better experience on your next journey. I do recommend to have the document with you, if you do not have it already, because that would help processes through security and you certainly would not to have to give up film photography.
Kind regards,
Heathrow Passenger Support.”
Pardon my French, but these people do not give a fuck. Also note the lack of a link to the documents I requested. I responded and asked for them again (along with point-by-point refutations and additional questions), that was more than two years ago and I am yet to receive a reply.
Genuine question: Why do people still use film anymore? I know some big movie studios do sometimes use it (The Hobbit comes to mind), but I don’t understand why anyone would use film when we have DSLRs that can have resolutions over 30 megapixels. EDIT: added “why” at beginning
Personally I enjoy the mystery of taking a photo and waiting to see how it turned out, there is a charm to film photography that isn't captured by digital for me. Getting photos developed is equally exciting, and having the physical copies to hand out or place in an album is nice. It's a dying art, but being held together by enthusiasts.
(While I shoot negative much more often, it doesn't have the same visceral impact as positives.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The LargeSense LS911 features a single shot 9×11-inch monochrome CMOS sensor with a 75-micron pixel size, a high base sensitivity of ISO 2100, and a maximum sensitivity of ISO 6400. https://petapixel.com/2018/04/17/largesense-unveils-worlds-f...
This thing only shoots 12mp images (and only in black and white). Nothing like what you'd get from an actual large format film camera.
I must admit 12MP is lower than I expected. It seems the intent was to use large pixels to get huge tonal range rather than small pixels for resolution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The LargeSense LS911 features a single shot 9×11-inch monochrome CMOS sensor with a 75-micron pixel size, a high base sensitivity of ISO 2100, and a maximum sensitivity of ISO 6400. https://petapixel.com/2018/04/17/largesense-unveils-worlds-f...
That was great, thanks. Still doubt you'll ever see one.
My first job over a decade ago was managing a photo lab. The x-ray machines would often damage film that people traveled with. Amateur photographers just weren't aware. The damage typically looks like white fuzzy diagonal lines across the image. It's not enough to completely destroy a picture, but it'll ruin it. The most common widespread damage we saw were people that bought like 50 disposable cameras for their Cari…
[edit] Looked it up on wikipedia and TIL that the Tri-X chemistry was updated as recently as 2007.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The LargeSense LS911 features a single shot 9×11-inch monochrome CMOS sensor with a 75-micron pixel size, a high base sensitivity of ISO 2100, and a maximum sensitivity of ISO 6400. https://petapixel.com/2018/04/17/largesense-unveils-worlds-f...
This thing only shoots 12mp images (and only in black and white). Nothing like what you'd get from an actual large format film camera.