Need a opinion on this picture.

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
fferreres Senior Member • Posts: 1,857
Re: Need a opinion on this picture.

Guy Parsons wrote:

fferreres wrote:

Quick question, is there any process to transform from pixel (squares) to circles?

Obviously, a sensitive 2D surface which isn’t a grid will register things as circles, without any alignment to horizontal or vertical grids. But in a camera, they would be aligned. However, on paper, and in our retina where the rods and cones are not square but more akin to circles, we could say that film “look” more real in a sense, or more pleasing. The act of being made of circles matches our neuronal functions. Is there a process to scale things in a way that treats squares as circles? For example, each pixel is a circle that don’t overlap but where they don’t we place a circle that the average of the four adjacent ones (maybe not covering all of it just a good portion) which leaves I little still uncovered, and again we average on each axis the new dot with those 2 adjacent in that axis, and use a smaller dot there, etc? Would this look better if printed large?

I'm really not sure what the problem is that you see.

When printing, the result is not simply pixels on paper but a random splatter of micro dots all over and about the position of that notional pixel. If anything that has made your assumed square pixel into a round one that merges gently into the adjacent pixel.

The thing to remember is that it takes around 300 original camera pixels per inch of print to look sharp and detailed, down to a sensible low limit of around 200 of those pixels per inch to still look reasonably good.

The actual printing process in printer drivers reorganises the pixels (whatever the file being fed to the printer) by interpolation into 600 pixels per inch for Canon and Epson into 720 pixels per inch so that is the density of those new round pixels on the paper. The human eye simply can't resolve that resolution, it all simply looks like smooth printing with no discernible "pixels".

Regards..... Guy

Since nature is “round”, the eye cones are “rounded” and the observation from the previous poster, I was wondering if our camera sensors wells are square, and if the film noise could be interpreted (perceptually) as having more resolution. After all it seems that film is building the scene with little circles. The grain, if any is visible at certain magnification, if always circles, never squares.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow