Originally posted by Student I agree. Say, 10MP on a full frame sensor would already produce a better image than film. With the right software a full frame 10MP image can be enlarged to the point where you can make a poster as big as a skyscraper. No one needs 300MP.
not a chance a well scanned 35 mm film is more than 10mp, and for a large scale print (ie advertising) in all likelihood if it was shot on film it would be medium format or large format in most cases (there is a studio on my street who specializes in Automobile shots (huge bay with an insane lighting setup) he is currently shooting the phase one 80mp full frame 645 back for most things but is also set up for large format 4x5 and 8x10
shoots do get done on FF digital there and as low as 12 MP on the nikon but not for this scale of print
the right tool for the job and the ability to use it well is what gets him big money
You can print with a smaller interpolated file in a large format but it gets soft, so if sharpness is important to the shot it needs the large file.
I do agree however that from a noise standpoint less MP has frequently been the better option (ie a 12 mp FF vs a 12 MP apsc the FF will be less noisy and generally perform better - caveat being of course most FF are no longer low MP and suffer the same issue due to pixel density as an apsc in many cases, but the tech has improved enormously in the last few years)