Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 21, 2004, 11:44 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slipe
I have no use for TIFF but I shoot raw in my camera that has it. I would use SHQ if I had it on the cameras without raw.

A 35mm shot taken with good consumer 100 ASA film has about the same resolution as a 6Mp DSLR shot. But you can see the difference even in an 8 X 10 between photos taken with 35mm and medium or large format with higher resolution. So I donít care what the theory says, the proof is in the pudding and higher resolution tends to give better prints.

Iím sure there is a limit Ė especially if you are printing on an inkjet. But some of the new inkjets are pretty spectacular.

You never know when you are going to get that great shot you want to blow up and hang on the wall. And you donít know where the future will take you. 5 years from now when you have a 9600 X 19200 DPI wide format printer you picked up for $150 you might regret having your earlier photos nearly useless. Buy a bigger card and take the pictures at best resolution. Those photos are your lifetime memories.
interesting, I have read some reviews from steve on some camaras that are 2-3 megapix, and he has said a given camara gave "photo quality prints" does that seem right??
rodH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 7:25 AM   #12
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodH
interesting, I have read some reviews from steve on some camaras that are 2-3 megapix, and he has said a given camara gave "photo quality prints" does that seem right??
The term is used loosely, and is subject to a lot of interpretation. Generally speaking, it is talking about a specific print size that can be used, without obvious pixelation in the image. These does not necessarily mean that a higher resolution camera can't show more detail at a given print size.

Also, some of the articles that Slipe referred to are talking about a DSLR, not a Consumer Digital Camera, at enlargements to a given print size. There is a big difference in a Consumer Camera and a Digital SLR. A Digital SLR's much larger sensor (with larger photosites for each pixel) is capable of higher dynamic range, compared to the very tiny CCD Sensors used in a non-DSLR model.

These articles compared Cameras like the Canon EOS-D30 and EOS-D60 to film very favorably. However, even these articles are subject to interpretation, since you have to take into account variables like the Scanner (and display/print technology) used, and the limitations of the test mediums.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 8:24 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

I'd agree with Nagasaki, on the basis that the best that current professional laser scan photoprinters can offer (and you're unlikely to beat that) is 300dpi and possibly 400dpi for some Kodak services. Even for film input, many firms now are scanning negs and running the images through digital photo printers, and I haven't heard consumers complaining their photos look and feel any different. So living in the real world where the photo chain must have synergy in performance with other devices and affordable devices or services I offer the following:

For a 6x4 print (if that's all you will do) and allowing for a bit of cropping your capture resolution (assuming your lens will resolve the detail!) will be about 2.3Mpix, for 5X7 about 3.3Mpix, and for 8X10 about 8Mpix. Reducing the camera resolution below this, then becomes subjective and scene dependent.

You can see from this that for most current affordable cameras, shooting maximum resolution will allow some for cropping and get the best detail from the best photo printer technology available at the moment. At the end of the day, electronic resolution specs in digital terms don't mean this is detail that is actually captured by the lens, or appears on print media if you look with a microscope! Sharpening and resolution enhancement can play tricks on our impression of resolution, but I've kept my reply to 'native' resolution.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 8:47 AM   #14
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

The simple answer with current technology is to use this chart:

http://www.cordcamera.com/products/d...ct_ratios.html

However, since memory cards are very inexpensive, I'd still suggest shooting in the highest resolution your camera supports.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 11:51 PM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC
The simple answer with current technology is to use this chart:

http://www.cordcamera.com/products/d...ct_ratios.html

However, since memory cards are very inexpensive, I'd still suggest shooting in the highest resolution your camera supports.
Jim, that is a great site. Although it looks like the DPI info is in regards to the printer and not the camera
rodH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2004, 12:03 AM   #16
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodH
Jim, that is a great site. Although it looks like the DPI info is in regards to the printer and not the camera
No. It's designed to show you how much resolution you need for a given print size, in order to achieve 150dpi, 200dpi, or 300dpi. Cord Camera sells prints, and uses the chart to show their customers what image size (in resolution) is needed for the desired quality.

Actually, the terminology is just wrong. They should have noted ppi (pixels per inch).

Often times, the terms are used interchangeably.

If you follow the chart, you'll see what your minimum image size (in resolution) needs to be to get the desired number of pixels per inch for a given print size.

I'd suggest at least 200 (you can see a noticeable difference in quality going from 150 to 200 pixels per inch). Of course, as I've mentioned before, the higher the better IMO.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:40 PM.