Having seen one more discussion forum devolve into a debate over megapixels, I'm suggesting a digital version of Godwin's Law, along with a ruling that the first person who raises the issue in any forum is automatically declared a loser.
Godwin's Law for Digital Photographers
- Thread starter unfocused
- Start date
- Status
O
Osiris30
Guest
unfocused said:
I'm going to vote agree on one condition/criteria.. if there is a thread started *specifically* to discuss the merits or lack thereof of MP counts, then said thread is immune from said action.
Upvote
0
W
WarStreet
Guest
Where is the don't agree option ? 
If the subject is tackled in a mature way I believe it will be helpful and instructive. There is lot of confusion about this subject, and I always avoided to mention anything about it since I am afraid of the usual degradation.
I believe the audience of this forum is mature enough.
If the subject is tackled in a mature way I believe it will be helpful and instructive. There is lot of confusion about this subject, and I always avoided to mention anything about it since I am afraid of the usual degradation.
I believe the audience of this forum is mature enough.
Upvote
0
Rocky said:
I would like to add the personal attacks ARE banned, and perpetrators will be dealt with accordingly.
Upvote
0
W
WarStreet
Guest
I can't believe that after writing here that I never mentioned anything about MP, I just replied to a post regarding this subject !! No problem admin, I never attack people
Upvote
0
T
tzalmagor
Guest
The basic question is technical, so the proper way to handle the recuring discussions about it is a FAQ. My suggestion for the FAQ should say "the number of megapixels should be sufficient for the photographer to crop the image and print it in the desired size, less than that is insufficient, more than that is dead weight".
Upvote
0
B
BlackEagle
Guest
This is probably the sliest tread I can think of in this forum. It's probably even sillier then the dreaded more MP discussions itself. So, someone is declared a looser on a given topic because 7, 8 people voted that they should be declared a looser. And what happens when you guys decide someone is a looser because you voted that they should be a looser... You get a trophy or sth
Let the people speak their minds even if you think you are sick and tired of seeing the same topic hundreds of times. You like it contribute to the discussion… you don't then don't waste your precious life by creating a new tread that tells people what they can and cannot speak. Come on now isn't banning certain topics no matter how dumb they are the same thing that dictators do? I am going to start a free speak revolution here like the one in Egypt Ok before I end my reply I have one suggestion also. Let's declare the person who complains about the more MP discussion a looser
Let the people speak their minds even if you think you are sick and tired of seeing the same topic hundreds of times. You like it contribute to the discussion… you don't then don't waste your precious life by creating a new tread that tells people what they can and cannot speak. Come on now isn't banning certain topics no matter how dumb they are the same thing that dictators do? I am going to start a free speak revolution here like the one in Egypt
Ok before I end my reply I have one suggestion also. Let's declare the person who complains about the more MP discussion a looser
Upvote
0
I agree with the last (but two) post. More MP are always going to be better. Just one proviso: provided its not at the cost of noise, DR or as Canon seem to be inflicting on us recently, low ISO banding.
More MP bring a major benefit not often discussed: The tonal range is better, simply because there are more pixels to represent the changes in tone. I know that I can get away with an A3+ print from an 8 MP uncropped RAW file on a good day, but it will never be as good as an 80 MP file printed to the same size. So just imagine how good an 800MP file would look.
More MP bring a major benefit not often discussed: The tonal range is better, simply because there are more pixels to represent the changes in tone. I know that I can get away with an A3+ print from an 8 MP uncropped RAW file on a good day, but it will never be as good as an 80 MP file printed to the same size. So just imagine how good an 800MP file would look.
Upvote
0
C
Canonix
Guest
motorhead said:
Rather depends on how good the printer is, doesn't it?. How many pixels per inch (or centimetre) should a decent printer print? Perhaps it's not about how tiny the pixels are, but what you do with them?
Upvote
0
N
NotABunny
Guest
motorhead said:
That's not tonal range, it's spacial resolution. You still have 14 bits of tonal range. Anyway, I know of no printer who can print 14 bits of tonal range, and no display either.
P.S. Is it ironic that this thread shifted toward a discussion about megapixels, or was it to be expected?
Upvote
0
- Status
