1 Megapixels
Lyric Maro
How are the Canons? The particular model I was looking at is around 200 dollars and i was just curious to see if the quality for scanning 3mm and 120 film and slides is acceptable? I realize it's not going to be on par with the super high res razor sharp scans made by pro labs (at $4.00-10.00 PER IMAGE) but just wanted to get an idea if results were of decent quality. The scanner I was looking into is the Canon 8800F. Thanks in advance!
Wow, didn't expect to get so many responses! And Kelly, I work at Wal-Mart and we DO sell junky 5mp cameras in blister packs ;-) So as I understand it it's a quantity vs. quality job. Like comparing a 10mp point and shoot 199.99 Kodak to a 10mp Nikon D200? Just because they're both 10 megapixels doesn't mean the quality of the sensor is the same on both.
I've also been looking at the Epson 4990. They claim (here we go again) 6400 optical but they actually list the dmax which is quoted as 3.4 From my understanding that's pretty decent. I was unable to find a dmax quote for the Canon 8800F, would anyone perhaps know where I could find that information? Thanks in advance,
Yes, I've read about this. Sadly, it isn't me, because I'd surely be making more money than I am now selling cameras to people who think that a "scene mode" on a point and shoot means that the camera superimposes your portrait in front of a pre-loaded landscape photo backdrop of Hawaii. I actually had to explain this to a disappointed woman today; that a scene mode refers to exposure compensation settings for conditions such as "snow" and "beach" which attempts to compensate for the resulting underexposure, because theoretically, the camera's built in light meter is not as smart as my customers. ;-) So...does anyone know where I can find a photographer to assist in the Boston area? Because Wally World is for the birds.
I try to upload my vector works shutterstock page. But This page always give me error about your .EPS artwork must be bigger than 4 megapixels size ! This is strange, because vector file how count with "megapixel" but, i try after my artwork export something.eps, open it Adobe Illustrator, in AI i will set "artboard" size is 4000x4000 pixel than later save as something.eps, after this i upload shutterstock then accepted. Sorry for my English, but all this extra steps make me be tired. In Affinity designer is this have anywhere settings ?
i need minimum 4mp. so i will set it bigger but all this ways i try nothing changed. Even file size is always see 38.3 kb !.. i use 300 dpi and nothing change !.. How is it possible this is "impossible" before i make it in affinity than later open in adobe illustrator, there i can resize artboard and later okay but it not work anymore too after adobe illustrator cc 2020 ! ? two different programs, before i did, now i can't ?! What changed i don't know.
I know .eps, .AI vb. vector formats how is it possible can be count with megapixels ! But shutterstock need it, before with Adobe Illustrator i set atrboard size 4000x4000 and it will be okay. But now even with Adobe Illustrator it not work ! What changed i don't understand that. Ayyway, today i want to learn don't need Adobe Illustrator for this, but i see impossible save .EPS file with Affinity Designer 4,6,8,20 megapixel ?! I will trying add screenshots here now. I hope that screenshots help for understanding my problem.
I try artboard 6000x4000 or 4000x3000 pixel in Adobe Illustrator, but when i save .EPS interesting nothing changed all different artboard size files same visible ! Nothning changed in AdobeIllustrator CC2020... I add another screenshot
I created a 3000x2000px sized document with 72dpi and exported it to EPS. When I upload it to Shutterstock, I get the message "The size of your artwork (not the size of the artboard) must be at least 4 megapixels.".
A camera sensor is also said to have pixels. In this context, a pixel refers to the number of photosites on a sensor. Photosites are the individual sensing areas that capture light, which is then translated into pixels through software.
The important value for photographers is the number of effective megapixels. This is the number of megapixels that will be in your full-size image when you open up your Raw developer or export a JPEG at maximum size.
If you shoot Raw (and you should), these are combined by your Raw editor through a process called demosaicing to produce what you see when you open a Raw file. If you shoot JPEG, then the camera does the demosaicing.
However, if there were only as many photosites as the final number of desired pixels, then the edges would not have enough photosites for accurate color information. For example, this is what happens when you try and compute color values only from the edge pixels:
In the example on the right, there are 44 or 16 color photosites. Usually, the value of each pixel is computed using four photosites. But when you get to the end of the row, there are only two photosites for the fourth pixel of that row. Therefore, to get a 44 grid of pixels in the final image, you actually need a 55 grid of photosites so each of the 44 pixels has full color information. (I simplified this process a little bit. In reality, the demosaicing stage typically uses a better algorithm than I just outlined.)
However, these additional edge pixels are not enough to account for all the extra pixels. In fact, most cameras have pixels that are completely obscured from light! You can think of them as pixels with black paint on them. These are the so-called optically black pixels. Why should there be pixels on the sensor that cannot even sense light?
Unfortunately, even in total darkness, a sensor will still generate a signal (the dark signal) that will be translated into something other than pure black. This is undesirable, because obviously you want black to register as black.
This correction is typically derived from a model that depends on temperature, which in turn is estimated from the optically black pixels. In practical terms, the hotter your sensor, the more unwanted signal (noise) comes through, and the camera estimates this via these extra pixels to account for it.
A similar technique is used in long-exposure noise reduction, where a dark frame is taken either manually or by the camera to reduce noise. Unfortunately, not all noise can be predicted from the optically black pixels (nor can hot pixels), which is why dark frame subtraction is still useful for long exposures.
As you can see, the number of megapixels you need becomes insane as the print size goes up. I guess everybody who wants to make large prints should go out now and buy the Fuji GFX 100S, right? Well, not exactly. The number of pixels you need is also dependent on the typical viewing distance!
From these considerations, I recommend the following: If you are happy keeping your prints at most 1624 inches, almost any modern sensor will be fine (since the entry point on cameras today is usually at least 20MP). So, this means any recent micro four thirds, APS-C camera, or low-resolution full-frame camera will suffice.
Even if you lack a bit of resolution for a print at your desired PPI, you can use software methods that can do advanced upscaling. Some cameras like the Panasonic GH6 also have pixel-shift or high resolution modes that are suitable for some subjects and provide more resolution. For example, my Panasonic G9 has a pixel-shift mode that produces an 80MP Raw image, which works well as long as everything in the frame is completely stationary.
On the other hand, if you want to print 2436 or higher, you will have more freedom with a high-resolution full-frame sensor like that in the Nikon Z7, Canon R5, or Sony A1. An even higher resolution full-frame camera, like the Sony a7R IVA, which has 61MP, is an excellent choice for those who need to make massive prints.
The second consideration is cropping, which in some cases is unavoidable. As a wildlife photographer for instance, I am often cropping because not all species are easy to get close to. Cropping is also common in macro photography, because the size of the subject in the photo is often limited by the maximum magnification of the macro lens.
So for shooters who use need to crop substantially, I would recommend the higher megapixel bodies like the Canon R5 over lower megapixel ones like the Canon R6. Looking at the print chart above, the 45MP of the Canon R5 will give many more print options. Even after a 1.5x crop, the 45MP of the Canon R5 will still leave you 20MP, whereas the 20MP of the Canon R6 will become 8.9MP.
A pixel is the fundamental building block of an image, and generally, the more pixels, the better. However, photographers are very lucky with modern cameras because most of them have more than enough pixels for almost any situation. For very large printing and cropping, it is definitely worthwhile to have more pixels, and so cameras in the 40-60MP range can be very useful. However, even a 20MP camera can make a very nice large print, and fewer pixels should not hold you back. I look forward to hearing how 100MP is the ultimate level of photography in the comments!
Jason Polak is a bird and wildlife photographer from Ottawa, Canada. He has been interested in photography ever since he received a disposable film camera as a small child. His career as a mathematician led him to move to Australia in 2016, where he started seeing colorful parrots. A few casual shots with a lens completely unsuitable for birds got him hooked, and now wildlife photography is his biggest passion. Jason loves to show the beauty of animals to the world through photography, and one of his lifelong goals is to photograph five thousand species of birds. You can see more of Jason's work on his website or on his YouTube channel.
64591212e2