Pixel peeping is a waste of time!

[Eric Rose]

I have outlined my thoughts on this religious activity on a new blog posting: Eric G. Rose – Where It's At

 

[fstop]

Well its true that the early audio CD recordings were lacking. My stereo system at the time would show a major difference between a half speed master LP and a CD.
However that changed quickly,quality was much improved. (even though you won't find a CD recording of George Benson Breezin' or Steely Dan Aja that compares to a half speed master to this day)
Back to photography.
Once you get above 6mp image quality is very good no matter what.

 

[ann]

I would agree, in fact I don't think i have ever gone to that level and never understood the need.

If if looks good in the print at arms length i am a happy camper.

 

[Pioneer]

My prints from my 6mp camera still satisfy me. I have better cameras now but I can't say the prints are any better.

 

[L Gebhardt]

In general I agree with you, but I wouldn't call it a waste of time. It's good to know your tools and their limitations. Making prints is the end result for me, and it's always good to know how much things such as lens sharpness contribute to the final print. As you have discovered it's not as much as many people tend to think, especially at small sizes. To me the most important point is the need to print and to use how pleasing it is as the final benchmark.

 

[williamkazak]

Interesting blog, Eric. I like your comments about lenses being so important to the results. However, I don't know about your comments about camera bodies not having that creative of an impact. With some camera bodies, you cannot even get the shot off because of the speed of action, or the "available darkness".

 

[Eric Rose]

Thanks for the positive comments. William, indeed you are right however I was generally referring to decent cameras bodies. Although the "light leak" has been brought to a whole new artistic level by the Holga.