Please define “significantly more”.
20% more resolution is noticeable to a non professional eye.
5-10% more resolution may be noticeable to a pro photog.
Please define “significantly more”.
20% more resolution is noticeable to a non professional eye.
5-10% more resolution may be noticeable to a pro photog.
this monkey does not print (what for) but views raw images on a 32" 4k monitor. No problem seeing the difference, without any training whatsoever. Naked eye suffices.
this monkey does not print (what for) but views raw images on a 32" 4k monitor. No problem seeing the difference, without any training whatsoever. Naked eye suffices.
Evaluating the Canon 5Ds in terms of real world print performance, specifically comparing prints taken with the 11MP 1Ds and 21MP 1Ds mk3
www.northlight-images.co.uk
And, I’d add, Keith didn’t use any interpolation software (he has some great articles on it’s use). Now the first answer people always give is well you could interpolate both high and low resolution images and get even better results so the differences would remain constant but the point is more subtle than that, I’d say if I want to offer a given print size what resolution can I do that with given the software we have, 24” x 36” is my maximum print size, obviously a 5DSr does that quite well but how does a 5D III or a 1DX II compare to that given print size when processed optimally With interpolation? I’d wager very few people could tell the difference in most real world situations.
No more questions, and thanks for the answers. Whether we can discern clear and significant differences in resolution depends on the display medium for the image, its size, and our viewing distance (among other things) so I was curious.