Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Olympus

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 13, 2003, 4:56 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3
Default SHQ/HQ enlarge or not to enlarge

According to the manual on the C-750uz…

"When ENLARGE SIZE is selected, the actual 4 million pixels used by this
camera can be increased to the equivalent of approx. 8 million pixels (3200 ×
2400). This allows you to make quality prints in larger sizes, such as A3
(297 mm × 420 mm/11.7" × 16.5"). However, file sizes also become larger.
ENLARGE SIZE can be selected in the SHQ or HQ mode."

I have done some research on this so called "equivalent" 8Mp. The C-750 is a 4 Mp camera period. To achieve the equivalent 8Mp on the SHQ/HQ enlarge setting it utilizes interpolation. So it is not capturing an additional information from the shot, instead it make good guesses what the addition Meg pixels would look like if the CCD could do 8Meg pixels. Most high end photo software such as Photoshop will do the same thing if you want to enlarge you photo.

My question is;

Is this setting worthwhile or is it more efficient (less wasted xD memory) to simple use one of the other settings such as the 3:2 and use a software photo editor to enlarge (interpolate) since these large software programs probably have a more elaborate interpolation algorithm.


Dan.
dan_75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 13, 2003, 5:56 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

Dan

I have never printed A3 but I think the 4mp camera should print this with good quality. I have printed pics at 8X10 with a 3mp and obtained quality prints.

Phil
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2003, 6:29 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3
Default I agree but...

I agree, the lower settings would probably do well however, I am curious if the enlarge settings in the HQ and SHQ is actually worth the extra memory since it appears to interpolate to achieve this and not actually using more physical Mega Pixels.

I am of the mindset that I would like to save at the higher quality levels in the case I get that one breath taking shot I want to enlarge. But if the difference between 2288 x 1712 and the enlarge size 3200 x 2400 in SHQ and HQ is not addition physical pixels in action but merely interpolation that can be performed later and perhaps better on a high end photo editor. Than I would rather save my memory cards for addition pictures since this enlarge setting eats more memory.

Any opinions on this setting and how the manual describes it? A 4Meg pixel camera doesn’t just do 8Meg pixels. From my research on google, this so called effective 8Meg pixel described in the manual is done with interpolation.

Pg 103 in the C750UZ manual.
http://www.olympusamerica.com/files/C750UZ_Ref_Eng.pdf


Dan.
dan_75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2003, 7:17 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3
Default I have concluded…

As I have continued to research the "3200 x 2400 enlarge" setting, I have come to the conclusion that is worthless (unless you're printing enlargements directly from a card to printer without software).

If anyone wants to see a great review of the C-750/740, here is a link.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ol...ew/index.shtml

About 2/3 down the page he discusses the resolution and makes the comment that the 3200 x 2400 enlarge mode is not considered because, "That involves interpolation, and your images will lose quality as a result."

I will stick to the SHQ 2288 x 1712 for the best trade off between picture size and quality and crop or enlarge as I need in Adobe Photoshop, that is unless someone else has any additional information. I always keep an open mind but I question everything. Effective 8Mpixel, ya right… (good marketing though)

Dan.
dan_75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2003, 7:58 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3
Default

I found this link that might offer more insight to your original question:

http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog...digfiles1.html

I offer no opinion of my own because I just havent done enough experiments myself.
ghuddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2003, 6:43 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
fenlander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 251
Default

Dan

I think your last comment is absolutely right. I don't see any way that the interpolation provided in-camera can be as effective as that of dedicated software like Qimage or Genuine Fractals. The only reason to use in-camera interpolation would be if you were printing direct from memory card or having large prints done commercially straight from the card (would you really do that?).

fenlander
fenlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2003, 11:46 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,910
Default

You have to remember that interpolated images have information added by the camera (or computer) that wasn't in the original photograph. By using it in-camera you have no original photograph to go back to if the interpolated photo is ruined. At least if you do it on the computer you still have the unaltered photo from the camera to go back to.

The same with digital zoom...my camera's optical zoom maxes out at 380mm, but combined with digital it goes up to 1000mm; there's more chance though of ruining the 1000mm shot due to the fact that any camera shake is multiplied that much more. Again it can be duplicated on the computer and you don't have to worry about camera shake...plus again you have an original photo to go back to if you make a mistake on the computer; once digital zoom has been added in-camera it can't be removed.
Mike_PEAT 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 12:34 AM.