Digital Cam Resolutions vs. Printed Picture Size......
Pheare
I'm new to all this digital photography stuff and have a few questions
about what resolutions I should be taking pictures at in order to get
photo quality printouts at a given size. If there is a faq anywhere
that answers my questions, I'd gladly read it.
So here it goes:
1. What is the largest photo quality size print I can expect using a
2.1 megapixel camera set at its highest resolution? Using the 3.3
megapixels?
2. If I am only interested in printing out 4x6 pictures, do I need to
take a picture at 1600x1200 (or whatever the max. res. for the camera
is) or can I go to a lower resolution? I think cropping and stuff
comes into play here as well, but I don't really understand that
either (i know what cropping is, but not how it relates to resolution
and ultimately picture size; if it even does relate).
Any help is much appreciated.
Darren
db...@sprynet.com
able to help you. go to www.yahoo.com and do an advanced search
with usenet as the option and then digital photography as the search
word.
Dr. Terminus
it at 1600x1200. It won`t be perfect but it`ll be fine for most purposes!
At that resolution any smaller prints will come out great if you have a
decent photo quality printer.
If you only want to print 6x4 then even 640 resolution images will come out
fine! A 1600 resolution image printed at 6x4 will be even better.
I go for 1280 resolution on my camera which is a bit better. I get more pics
per media and still get the quality at 6 x 4. But for big A4 prints you
need the highest resolution. A lot depends on the software you use for
printing. Try to use something that is designed specifically for printing
images from a digital camera. You probably got something with it. I have
Epsons "Photoquicker" and it`s excellent for running off 6 x 4 prints from
1600 res images right down to 640. It autosizes! With some programs you
have to manually resize which I`ve found to be troublesome.
BTW if you ever want to add text to an image and print it do so in a Desktop
Publishing program and leave it as an unmerged image. If you add text and
save it off as a new image the text will com eout fuzzy. Keep the text as a
separate floating layer.
Dr.T
Pheare <dgo...@gds.ca> wrote in message
news:ve24jtkbhh8o32git...@4ax.com...
Rolf Keller
> BTW if you ever want to add text to an image and print it do so
in a Desktop
> Publishing program and leave it as an unmerged image. If you
add text and
> save it off as a new image the text will com eout fuzzy. Keep
the text as a
> separate floating layer.
I think this depends on the file format you use. In order to keep
the file small certain fomats (e. g. *.jpg) reduce the
information by slightly falsifying some "unimportant" pixels.
With normal photographs this is hardly noticeable, but items with
clear shapes and/or uniform colors (lines, text etc.) are turned
into scrap. That's why such files should never be
modified/edited - just use them for final images only.
OTOH there are formats that compress the data in a "loss-free"
way (e. g. *.gif) or do not perform any compression at all (e. g.
*.bmp). With these formats you should not experience any trouble
regarding added text.
--
Rolf (remove '77' from mail address)
Dr. Terminus
Try creating a CD insert using any of the formats you mention and compare
the results with an unmerged DTP image produced in something like Microsofts
Home Publisher. The difference is vast! Believe me I`ve tried!!
Also I find DTP programs print size much , much more accurately. It`s what
they`re for after all.
Dr.T
Rolf Keller <rokel...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:9gvdao$8ml$04$1...@news.t-online.com...
David Chien
> 1. What is the largest photo quality size print I can expect using a
> 2.1 megapixel camera set at its highest resolution? Using the 3.3
> megapixels?
>
See www.silverace.com/dottyspotty/ for the film vs. digital article and
calculate the desired lp/mm of resolution you expect.
As a basic rule of thumb, don't expect any <4MP <$2000 digital camera to
beat a $50 Ricoh R1 P&S camera in terms of resolution of fine details and
so forth on a direct comparison of identical scenes shot film and digital
and printed 8x10" big.
However, for most people, it'll be -good- enough that they can go home
happy.
I'd say about 4x6" for 2MP; 5x7" for 3.3MP as the largest you can go and
still get crisp, film-like resolution for most people -- but read my
article and calculate the desired lp/mm you want and go from there.
---
You can do 'tricks' to make any 3.3MP look 'better' even at 8x10" such as
sharpening, contrast enhancements, etc., but that'll take much longer than
a straight, raw print.
> 2. If I am only interested in printing out 4x6 pictures, do I need to
> take a picture at 1600x1200 (or whatever the max. res. for the camera
> is) or can I go to a lower resolution? I think cropping and stuff
> comes into play here as well, but I don't really understand that
> either (i know what cropping is, but not how it relates to resolution
> and ultimately picture size; if it even does relate).
You can get away with about 1.3MP or about 1280x960 if you want at 4x6".
Smaller and you'll see more pixelization, but yes, you can get away with
less at 4x6" than 2MP+.
Jim Untch
photography as an off and on hobby since my photography class in college
(1976), and I just bought my first digital camera...a Kodak DC240 1.3
megapixel for $160 at Office Max. I'm extremely happy with the results I've
gotten. I wanted a cheap camera that I wouldn't worry about my two young
daughters using too. My (new) Hp1215 does a good job at printing 4X6, and
5X7 prints, IMHO. I also had fun getting 24 free prints from (emailing)
www.photoworks.com I noticed that their 4X6 prints had more detail in
background leaves that were in some of my pictures...I guess their $10,000
printer is better than my $379 printer! Thanks again...Jim
--
Jon Cohen
Rolf Keller <rokel...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>OTOH there are formats that compress the data in a "loss-free"
>way (e. g. *.gif)
Only if you consider reducing a 24-bit color image to an 8-bit color
image "loss-free".
Jon