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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 25, 2002, 3:42 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5
Default Camera which takes pics on 150dpi or on 300dpi?

I want to capture a digital image on maximum resolution(2560x1920) at 150dpi or morewith a digital camera.I currently have Sony f707.It takes pics on 72dpi with 2560x1920(max)resolution...and if you want to convert it on 300 dpi(for off-set printing)the pic size which this camera offers is 8"x6" with zero quality loss.So can anyone recomend a camera which could take pics on minimum 150 dpi or a camera which offers minimum 10"x12" pic size(when taken in PS) on 300dpi?
Ayesha is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 25, 2002, 8:03 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

You'll need an 11Mpix camera then, lots of loot and don't know if they exist outside of special NASA imaging projects! Zero quality loss, assume you mean no JPEG so you'll need a 100MB flash card to fit on one image.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2002, 8:22 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5
Default

Thanx.
Hmmmm....11 mega pixel camera!Will anyone recomend any specific camera at a good/affordable price?
I m sorry i used a wrong word"zero quality loss". ops: I know when saving pic as jpeg one can't say zero quality loss.
Ayesha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2002, 9:13 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

I would recommend 5mp camera by Olympus, Canon, Minolta, or Nikon. I prefer Olympus because that is what I use. You might consider the DSLR camera by the same vendors
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2002, 10:11 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 20
Default

> So can anyone recomend a camera which could take pics on
> minimum 150 dpi

No.
Cameras (input devices) do not take pictures at ANY dpi - niether 72 nor 300! Resolution in dpi (dots per inch) makes sense only for output - for printing. Cameras save pictures in files with a size in pixels (i.e. 2560x1920).

> I currently have Sony f707.It takes pics on 72dpi...

It doesn't. EXIF says 72 dpi, but it's meaningless. PS or other image editing software will change it to (almost) anything you want without altering your image. What will be changed then is the size (in inches) of the printout.

> or a camera which offers minimum 10"x12" pic size(when taken in
> PS) on 300dpi?

To get such a picture right from camera you need 10"x300dpi x 12"x300dpi = 3000 x 3600 pixels = 10.8 Megapixel camera, as Voxmagna already said. Or you can take a file from F707, go to Image Size dialog in PS, check "resample image" box, set resolution 300 and set width and height to whatever you like. PS will make a reasonable job resampling (adding pixels in your case) upwards to some size depending on your requirements. I print routinely 11x14" pictures from F717 with no quality problems that I'm aware of.
Sergey
twopizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2002, 3:39 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 5
Default

Thank you all for your help....and many thanks to "twopizza"for a detailed & helpful reply.
Ayesha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2003, 4:29 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 20
Default

Hi,
If an image of resolution 2560 x 1920px can contain size of 35x26 inches (approx.) impoting the image into ps, corel or any other image editing program, then why can not be print (Offset) at the same size of 35 x 26 inches.
hamid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2003, 6:20 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

the 2 hi res winners, as of the moment, are canon and kodak.

weighing in at 11MP is the Canon EOS-1Ds priced at an average $7500 for the body only. only big cf cards need apply. canon mount.

and then there is the Kodak DCS Pro -14n at 13.89MP going out at about $4600 for the body average. Nikon lens mount

both cameras have their strengths and weaknesses.

both approach or are equal to medium format image quality (depending on ones opinion)

serious commitment needed here or one psychotic episode with a credit card. i'm working one one or the other.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2003, 7:31 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hamid
Hi,
If an image of resolution 2560 x 1920px can contain size of 35x26 inches (approx.) impoting the image into ps, corel or any other image editing program, then why can not be print (Offset) at the same size of 35 x 26 inches.
The question is how many DPI (dots per inch) or detail is that? My calculations is it's 72dpi which isn't great (would be fine for a billboard far away, but not for close viewing, 150dpi is the recommended minumum for prints). I can take that picture from your camera and make it 10dpi which would turn it into a 250" x 185" picture (the worst quality you can get but which is ok for things like Jumbotrons and billboards made up of lights).
Mike_PEAT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 30, 2003, 12:23 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,050
Default

As mentioned above you can resample (interpolate) to almost any size and resolution you like. Trouble is the interpolation techniques commonly used (e.g. Bicubic) are c**p.

Take a look at Genuine Fractals, it's a PS6+ plug-in.

There is a demo available with 20 goes.

I tried it and I'm impressed.
steve6 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 1:42 AM.