Using the 16 exposure pixel shift with the new Sony using my system would give a print on the short axis of 63" at 300dpi. Even without pixel shift, one would have 31.6" on the short side. Not too shabby.
Using the 16 exposure pixel shift with the new Sony using my system would give a print on the short axis of 63" at 300dpi. Even without pixel shift, one would have 31.6" on the short side. Not too shabby.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
I looked at the Pentax K-1 II, (some one sent me so files). You can shoot RAW with pixel shift, I created a new 'combined' RAW image easy enough, or you can create a regular RGB tiff file. It might take a little while for some of the stitching programs to support it. But it is trivial to combine the information.Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt
Good to know, Ted. Thanks.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
The new Sony might arguably negate the need for manual stitching until you're needing to go bigger than 40x50" - and that should make it easier to build a high precision means of holding camera, lens & film in good relationship to each other for pretty much any purpose other than truly massive prints.
I have a rig where I shoot tethered straight to LR. I have a copy stand an a Kaiser Slimlight Plano, which has a CRI at or north of 95. LR has no problem recognizing the pixel shifted DNGs. The effect is subtle, but it basically eliminates noise even when adjusting the scan. It's delivering Imacon level quality at the very least. I am shooting with the Pentax 100/2.8 WR macro at it's sharpest aperture (F4.5).
That new Sony would eliminate the need to stitch would yes I would say would be well worth it. Your rig better be rock solid though... Shutter shock may be an issue even with EFCS. I will wait until Pentax implements the technology on a theoretical 45mp sensor, since they usually use the last gen I'm guessing that's what they'll do.
I think a rostrum camera chassis should be solid enough. Might even rig up the dichroic light source & see how it does.
Yes to all of that. Once you go that high res, alignment and the vibration situation become crucial. EFCS should be really helpful.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Here is an interesting article, you even create movement masks so that pixel shift can be used for moving objects. (it uses one the image for the moving parts of the imaging)
https://pixls.us/articles/rawtherape...x-pixel-shift/
But yes for scanning lack of movement is critical.
Some Z-axis pictures:
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks