Don't pick nits Moose ;-); that qualification is taken as read surely.
I meant the shot as I could see it. It applies to any assessment on
the internet unless we go the CH route and put the full-size file on a
server and we manage to download it on a decent connection.
Chris
On 2 Nov 2004, at 8:49, Moose wrote:
> Chris Barker wrote:
>
>> I know that we have seen it before Donald, and praised it ... but that
>> is a truly wonderful shot!m Well composed, nicely toned, beautifully
>> sharp, this photograph is exotic and technically excellent at once.
>>
> I agree, as I did before, that this is an exceptionally good
> photograph.
> However, I just don't see how one can tell if a photo is sharp or not
> from a JPEG 900 pixels on the long side. I've got some images that look
> nice and sharp at that kind of resolution, but clearly aren't when
> viewed at 100%. I only raise the issue here because this thread started
> out being about the quality of images from certain lenses and cameras
> vs. others.
>
> Moose
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|