Resolution of Photo CD and color film

I'll drink to that

D
I'll drink to that

  • 0
  • 0
  • 51
Touch

D
Touch

  • 1
  • 2
  • 55
Pride 2025

A
Pride 2025

  • 1
  • 1
  • 77
Tybee Island

D
Tybee Island

  • 0
  • 0
  • 73

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,356
Messages
2,773,484
Members
99,597
Latest member
mcafeejohn
Recent bookmarks
0

Prof_Pixel

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
1,917
Location
Penfield, NY
Format
35mm
This posting is to correct information I posted on APUG about color film. I'm posting it here, because even though it involves film, a few folks on APUG probably don't want to see it.

Correction:

It's been almost 25 years since I last worked with the PhotoCD Format so I was mixing the figures up.

In PCD, the highest standard resolution was called 16 Base and was 2048x 3072 (6.291 Mpx) with an uncompressed file size of 18 MB. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_CD

The file size was established in the Research Labs who looked at lots of images and decided that the 16 Base size adequately represented consumer 35 mm images due to issues like flair, camera shake, misfocus, etc. It was not designed to represent the maximum image quality possible.


Addition:

From a presentation I used to make in the early 1990's while at Kodak:

There is no generally accepted way to convert an AgX image into its 'PIXEL' equivalent, but we can approximate the pixel equivalent in the follow way:

Resolving power of a typical 100 speed color negative film at medium contrast is around 65 line pairs/mm.

A line pair represents a BLACK and a WHITE line so a line pair represents two pixels.

This means the film has around 130 pixels/mm.

For a 24 x 36 35mm frame this gives 3120 x 4680 = 14.6 million pixels.

The Nyquest Criterion (Sampling Theorem) says that to fully capture all the information, we must sample the information at a rate at least twice as high as the highest frequency detail we want to capture.

Thus, to fully capture all the information on this film, we must use a scanner that can capture at least 6240 x 9360 = 58.4 million pixels.

Note this is the maximum information content. Things like flair, camera shake, misfocus, etc, will significantly reduce it.
 

Les Sarile

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
3,419
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Format
35mm
Can you expand on, "There is no generally accepted way to convert an AgX image into its 'PIXEL' equivalent"

Do you have the data that gave them this conclusion:
  1. The file size was established in the Research Labs who looked at lots of images and decided that the 16 Base size adequately represented consumer 35 mm images
  2. Resolving power of a typical 100 speed color negative film at medium contrast is around 65 line pairs/mm.
 
OP
OP

Prof_Pixel

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
1,917
Location
Penfield, NY
Format
35mm
Can you expand on, "There is no generally accepted way to convert an AgX image into its 'PIXEL' equivalent"

Remember, this was over 25 years ago. The researchers I worked with in the Kodak Research Labs told me that. The resolving power approach was one way of trying to make an analog/digital comparison. Doing a little Googling, I found several examples of people making the same approach. Basically, it's like trying to make an apples/oranges comparison; the two approaches are different.

Do you have the data that gave them this conclusion:
  1. The file size was established in the Research Labs who looked at lots of images and decided that the 16 Base size adequately represented consumer 35 mm images

  1. It was over 25 years ago. The Photo CD Format speaks for itself. There was also a Pro Photo CD format that included a 64 base image, primarily for medium format images, but I believe could also be used for 35mm. This would give about a 25 mega pixel image.
    [*]Resolving power of a typical 100 speed color negative film at medium contrast is around 65 line pairs/mm.
Like I said, it was over 25 years ago. I picked a Kodak color negative film data sheet that listed resolving power in line pairs that was available at that time.

As I've said earlier, a 15 mega pixel film image won't be the same as a 15 mega pixel fully frame digital image, because the digital image only collects sharpness information at half the pixel locations because of the Bayer filter that is used. Like I said, it's an apples and oranges comparison.

What's the 'magic number' you think is correct?
 

Les Sarile

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
3,419
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Format
35mm
That is unfortunate that you don't have the data as certainly nobody can be relied on to remember technical details that far back. I was hoping that you at least have access to the data. Even though it is really old, it may have been useful for today's discussion.

Without any verifiable data to support your pixel count, how were you going to support your pixel count?
 
OP
OP

Prof_Pixel

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
1,917
Location
Penfield, NY
Format
35mm
Here's some sample resolving power data I've found:

E-78 Sensitometric & Image Structure Data for Kodak Color Films (1974)

Resolving Power Test-Object Contrast 1000:1
Ektachrome-X 80 lines/mm
High Seed Extachrome 50 lines/mm
Kodachrome II 125 lines/mm
Kodachrome-X 125 lines/mm
Kodacolor-X 63 lines/mm
Kodacolor II 63 lines/mm


F-32 Technical Data/Kodak T-Max Professional Films (March 2002)

Resolving Power Test-Object Contrast 1000:1
T-Max 100 200 lines/mm
T-Max 400 125 lines/mm

As I've said before, this applies only to the film. Actual camera shot images will have less. Your milage may vary :wink:
 
OP
OP

Prof_Pixel

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
1,917
Location
Penfield, NY
Format
35mm
For some reason I was under the impression that you had data and not just found data.

I DID have data at the time I made the presentation, but it's long gone after 25 years.

See also http://www.cacreeks.com/films.htm to further confuse things as well asms/thread/3756689

BTW, you still haven't presented any of YOUR data
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pellicle

Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
1,175
Location
Finland
Format
4x5 Format
Hi

BTW, you still haven't presented any of YOUR data

pardon me butting into your discussion, but what you say is pretty normal. Its one of the reasons I stopped participating around here. Lots of high contradiction opinions and when data is requested it seldom follows.
 
OP
OP

Prof_Pixel

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
1,917
Location
Penfield, NY
Format
35mm
Hi



pardon me butting into your discussion, but what you say is pretty normal. Its one of the reasons I stopped participating around here. Lots of high contradiction opinions and when data is requested it seldom follows.
I hear you 100%
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom