Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   General Discussion (
-   -   Is it really true that... (

Boxman Oct 13, 2004 12:19 PM

Is it really true that with digicams, you get best results when you take pictures one resolution below the highest available? For example if you had a 5 megapixel camera, you'll get better stills at 4 megapixels? I read this somewhere and I'm curious if this theory is actually valid.

frontier02 Oct 13, 2004 1:06 PM

I have never heard of anything like this and I am certainly no expert (as you can tell by my posts), but I can't imagine that it could be true. For example, if you had a 2mp camera, it would not make sense to take a picture at 1mp. I say this because my first digital camera was a 1mp Kodak DC215 and while it took "acceptable" pictures, I always wished for more mp. This may not hold true when you get up to the 5, 6, or 8 mp range.

photosbyvito Oct 13, 2004 1:21 PM

i guess it would depend on wat you mean by "better results"

you won't get as much resolution, but you get less noise...maybe?


Mikefellh Oct 13, 2004 1:52 PM

The question is how the camera arrives at the lower resolution picture...assuming it uses the whole imager matrix and resamples, a lower resolution picture can look better only because there's less information. It's like when you look at a poor quality picture on the camera's monitor vs. looking at it on a 19" monitor or print it out to the maximum size...defects aren't as noticable at the lower resolution, but it's a trick since there's less information, and anything like hot pixels gets blended in with the picture.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:24 PM.