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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 11, 2006, 5:00 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5
Default

My father just bought my sisters a new Canon Powershot A610 Digital Camera to take with them when they travel throughout Asia and Europe for a year.

Knowing how long they plan on travelling, I bought them an http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/pro...635&catid= ATP 2GB Super High Speed ProMax SD Memory Card.

Upon inserting the empty card, the camera tells me it can take the following amount of pictures with the image quality settings I selected.

3303 photos @ M2 (1600x1200) Fine

or

2164 photos @ M1 (2048x1536) Fine.

Now here is where I need your help.

Which settings would you guys/girls use if you wanted to take a lot of snapshots on your travels?

I think 80%+ of the photos will just be viewed on the computer/sent by e-mail. That is why I thinking of using the 1600x1200 Fine setting.

I took some photos comparing the Fine and Super-fine options. There seems to be little difference between the 2, with a pretty large file increase in Super-fine mode.
Would you just leave it at Fine quality?

They will be bringing 8 Sanyo 2500maH recharagable batteries, with the included 1 hr Sanyo quick charger (says it takes around 3 hours to charge all 4 batteries).
It supports the different world voltages, the only thing else to bring is different prong adapters so they can plug it into the wall sockets wherever they may be.

Am I forgetting anything else here?

Which settings would you recommend?

One more thing... how often should they reformat the flash card? I was thinking they could just keep all the images on the camera (since it will fit thousands) and never format it on their travels. But I have been reading that the flash cards should be reformatted often for optimal camera read/write speeds? Is this true?



TIA,
-Quickstrike
Quickstrike is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 11, 2006, 6:20 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
bernabeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990
Default

IF YOU FORMAT THE CARD YOU LOSE ALL THE STORED DATA / PICTURES !

Format AFTER downloading to your HDD and 'burning' a back-up CD.

If necessary purchase additional card(s).



IMO:

It is pointless to shoot with a good camera at any setting other than maximum resolution! You never know when you might get the shot of a lifetime!

Last edited by bernabeu; Jun 27, 2015 at 5:24 PM.
bernabeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2006, 6:27 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5
Default

Yeah, I realize that it erases everything.

Just wondering if I should go through the hassle of explaining how to backup the photos and how to reformat the card to my sisters.

Interesting point on this matter.

But, if you don't bother backing up the data. (not sure if they will or not).. wouldn't it be better to save more memories than have just a few really detailed ones?



bernabeu wrote:
Quote:
IF YOU FORMAT THE CARD YOU LOSE ALL THE STORED DATA / PICTURES !

Format AFTER downloading to your HDD and 'burning' a back-up CD.

If necessary purchase additional card(s).



IMO:

It is pointless to shoot with a good camera at any setting other than maximum resolution! You never know when you might get the shot of a lifetime!
Quickstrike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2006, 9:50 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4
Default

I think the choice to save more images vs. quality is a personal choice. I for one, would go for the higher quality images and just buy more/bigger memory. The reason I say this is because once the time has passed you can't go back and re-shoot a shot at higher quality.

It may be worth it for you buy another card to rotate in andget them to send the card to you once in a while to backup for them (if they don't have storage access/the skills).

I did face this situation when I bought my first digital camera. We had some shots that were lower quality. Later on, we decided to put them on DVD's to share with the family. The lower quality pictures were very grainy on the screen and hard to make out. You never know what you are going to do with a shot once you take it. That is why I go for the high quality. Just my two cents.
bigslickset is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2006, 11:04 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Default

There is no longer anywhere in the world where you cannot find a stall that will back-up digital pictures to a cd.
jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2006, 11:16 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5
Default

Ok ok.... just saying that 1600x1200 is still pretty darn big.

The quality is just as good as the higher resolution, just not as big proportionally.

It fits perfectly on my monitor (22"), but I will end up downsizing the 1600x1200 still some more when they get back. Probably to 1024x768, so when they look at it from their 17" monitors and send it through e-mail -- ppl won't need to scroll their cursor to see the rest of the image.

It sounds like none of you own this camera.

You know what I am saying? The images are still sharp and vivid.

Just limits the ultimate printing size -- which they don't plan on doing much of... or atleast not on large paper.
Quickstrike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2006, 11:35 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Default

At some point one of your sisters is going to take a picture that your granny thinks is just unbelievably fantastic. She is going to want to stick it on her wall. Being a bit short sighted she is going to want it fairly large. At that point you are going to be a bit miffed that you only have a 1600x1200 file... A bit trite, I know, but you get the idea.
You'll also have far more room to crop with a larger file. This can really make a huge difference to your images.
Given that backing up your pics is not going to be a problem I see no reason whatsoever to not have as good a copy as possible of everything you shoot. Batch convert the entire lot to 800px wide when they get back for computer use. You will still have the fine copies if ever you want to print/crop/enlarge/whatever.
jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 11, 2006, 11:49 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5
Default

Ok... you can see that I kind of came into this thread with my own stubborn thoughts.

But you guys are right, I will use the 2592x1944 (largest setting) and have room for 1394 photos instead of 3303.

Lets just clarify this though... I have read info from so called "experts" in photography saying that the superfine mode is not worth the hit on space. It is so marginal that you would only need it if you were doing very extensive photo editing.

Did I get this info right? Or should I lower the max photo count to 784 by using superfine mode?
Quickstrike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 12, 2006, 9:47 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4
Default

Maybe the "experts" are thinking that since you are using a 5MP point-and-shoot camera you will not be editing the pictures? Maybe they don't think the camera can produce high enough quality photos to warrant it?

You have to remember that everyone has their own way of doing things. It all comes down to this: More information at capture equals more possibilities at editing time. I look at it like this - I can always shrink the size to email a pic to my relatives.

If I were in your shoes I would hate to be banging my head against the keyboard in a couple of years because I didn't use the right settings. Sounds like your sisters will be making a trip that will surely be worth recording.
bigslickset is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 12, 2006, 10:48 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

Shop around long enough and you will likely find a self proclaimed expert who tells you what you want to hear.

If it comes down to a choice of fine at full resolution compared to a lower resolution at super fine I would definitely take the higher resolution. Neither of your sisters might ever become interested in image editing nor want a picture larger than 4 X 6. Even cropped some, a full resolution photo at fine is going to look great printed 4 X 6.

CDs are a good alternative to taking lower quality. Another alternative might be cyber cafes if they plan to keep in touch by email. I don't know how likely they are to regularly find high speed connections and memory card slots in Asia – it might depend on how far they are going into the boonies and how long they will stay. If they are common, a $23 membership at a place like pbase.com will give them 40 Gigs of storage for full sized images they can upload whenever opportunity arises. Or they could just email them to someone in the family with high speed connections and decent storage capability. Either email setup is probably safer than CDs.

784 photos obviously aren't going to be enough. They can stretch that out quite a bit by editing when they have an electrical connection for their charger. Of the 20 shots of the temple there might be 3 great ones that preserve the memory fine. But 1394 or even 3303 aren't going to be enough for a year's tour of Europe and Asia.

If they are capable of traveling alone for a year they are certainly smart enough to change the quality setting. When they are able to arrange decent storage I would think best quality and resolution would be appropriate. If storage becomes sparse they can switch to fine, but I wouldn't plan on lower resolution if it can be avoided.


slipe 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 6:38 PM.