Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 1, 2004, 4:06 AM   #1
Senior Member
EOS RT's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 141

Has anyone used the 'Optimum Image Enlargement Mode' (3,200 x 2,400) on an Olympus C-7xx camera, and made a large (at least 11x14 inch) print of the photo?

For those who have done this, which camera was used? (I'm looking ideally for results from the C-740 and C-750) What was the result? How did it compare to images printed at the native resolution?
EOS RT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 1, 2004, 10:57 PM   #2
Junior Member
jegelstaff's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5

Hello, I have not used that feature of my C-765 camera, but I have experience working in the graphic design, and graphics software industries, and based on what I know about image resolution and printing....

I would say that an interpolated image will not look any better than the native resolution. What you are doing is trying to add detail where none exists. Once the image is processed in the camera, at whatever the native resolution is, that's all the detail that there is, period. You don't get a more detailed image by interpolating more pixels, you just get a bigger physical size for the image. It is no different than opening a full size native resolution image into Photoshop and doubling the number of pixels.

From what I hear, doing this kind of thing in post processing in Photoshop or whatever you use, is almost always better than having the camera do it for you.

That's not to say that the larger size image will look like crap when printed on the larger size paper. It might still look good, depends on how good the original shot is, and how smart the interpolation algorithm is that the camera uses. But for certain, the image will look noticeably worse than the same image taken at the same resolution but with a camera that can actually take picture at that resolution natively (without interpolation). The second image would simply have more detail, because the image would actually be at the larger resolution, and so it would be guaranteed to look better.

An interpolated image should look about the same as a non interpolated one when printed at a small size (say 4x6 or even 5x7). That's because in both cases (downsizing the native, and the interpolated image) you're giving up detail, so it doesn't matter how much bigger the interpolated image is, that has nothing to do with reducing the image size.

So, if you're printing at a small size, there's absolutely no reason to interpolate at all.

Basically, considering the extra memory space the interpolated images take up, because they're bigger, and the fact you have way more control if you do this yourself in post-processing, there's very little reason to use the interpolated settings. In my opinion, it's only put there for people who just want a really big photo to dump straight to their printer, for instance, because they don't have photo software on their computer (or maybe they don't even have a computer).

Some useful links about interpolation:


Good luck,

jegelstaff is offline   Reply With Quote

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:17 AM.