The point is to explain to someone who isn't a scientist why most 22mp backs are better than most 22mp dSLRs. Why pixels are not all created equally. Assume you have about 10 characters worth of space to explain that and the person is not the 5% of users who get deeply involved in the science. "True 16 bit" is about as good as I can come up with as most customers understand the difference between 8 and 16 bits elsewhere in photography. I also considered "Great tonal smoothness" or "holds up to strong styling in post processing well" but it didn't have the same ring and took up much more room. I'm open for suggestions. We're not trying to be dishonest or disingenuous.
The real world advantage is real (e.g. how the file looks after you add a lot of contrast and local dodge/burn or a significant change in WB) but the explanation could take up many pages regarding the entire imaging chain (including the quality, not just bit depth, of the A/D convertor and dark frame technology) and the emphasis throughout the chain on image quality over convenience, features, speed, or cost.
Anyone who has dealt with us (Capture Integration) knows our emphasis is on the real world and on results and real world testing not specs or marketing spiels - but the reality of marketing is you have only a few seconds of attention span and a few characters to use it.
I'm serious when I say I'm open for suggestions.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183Newsletter
| RSS FeedBuy Capture One 6 at 10% off