Pro Photo HOME
Go Back   Pro Photo HOME > Professional Digital Equipment Discussion > Digital Photography Accessories & Technology
Register Now for FREE!
Our records show you have not yet registered. Sign up for your FREE account INSTANTLY. Free accounts provide basic access.

Username: Password: Confirm Password: E-Mail: Confirm E-Mail:
Agree to receive admin email and abide by forum rules 

ColorRight

Reply
 
LinkBack (1) Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth
  #8  
Old 06-15-2007, 08:32 PM
KoryGunnarsen's Avatar
KoryGunnarsen KoryGunnarsen is offline
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Rochester, New York
Posts: 38
Referrals: 0
KoryGunnarsen 10
Send a message via Yahoo to KoryGunnarsen
Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth

Good call Lloyd, very often photographers get caught up in resolution and technology and better color and loose sight of the art. Why did we get into this medium? Sometimes you need to just need to go out and shoot.
What is White Balancing ?
Pro Review of White Balance.
Get your Color Right in 15 seconds
www.colorright.com




Support Pro Photo Home. Buy all your gear at the Pro Photo Store and B&H.


__________________
Kory Gunnarsen
Booksmart Studio
http://www.korygunnarsen.com
http://www.booksmartstudio.com
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth
  #9  
Old 06-15-2007, 08:36 PM
michaelnotar michaelnotar is offline
Lifetime Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Idaho, USA
Posts: 874
Referrals: 0
michaelnotar 10
Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth

dont know if its been mentioned here, but MP count only really makes a difference when you double it, ie 4-8-16MP, not 8-10-12. now 4mp was P/S a year ago, 8MP is a moderate SLR, and 16MP is the highest one in existance (SLR that is).
__________________
Michael
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth
  #10  
Old 06-16-2007, 06:09 AM
DierkHaasis's Avatar
DierkHaasis DierkHaasis is offline
Lifetime Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hamburg (Germany)
Posts: 619
Referrals: 0
DierkHaasis 10
Send a message via ICQ to DierkHaasis Send a message via AIM to DierkHaasis Send a message via MSN to DierkHaasis Send a message via Yahoo to DierkHaasis
Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregScheidemann View Post
They can't produce anywhere near 300 dpi with their 150 lpi screens, but you do need to submit a 300 dpi at the full size of reproduction, to avoid to possibility of moire appearing due to the 'phasing' to the two resolutions (150 dpi and 150 lpi) matching up in odd ways.
This doesn't make much sense. 'LPI' stands for 'lines per inch', 'DPI' is 'dots per inch'. As a rule of thumb [there's some 'frictional loss' due to the differences in printing method] you can use the number '2' to convert one into the other. You may remember from geometry class that to define a line you need two dots; 150 lpi come down to 300 dpi. That's exactly where the myth of the standard 300 dpi stems from. Moiré has to do with the angles at which the different colour plates in a CMYK process are printed.

Actually many magazines do not print at 150 lpi, which is a quality found mostly in High Art mags [are there still any around?], typically you see magazine photos printed at 120 lpi, which translates to 240 dpi. In case you wonder about Adobe's default printing resolution, there you have it. As several knowledgeably people point out ever so often, 200 dpi is well enough for most subjets to be printed - even landscapes!

Many folks still think, 'the more the better', which is wrong. The only thing you achieve when throwing 300 dpi at your inkjet printer is a slower system, less available RAM for the time of printing, and the print driver throwing away all unnecessary data. Giving a high-res image file to your printing house only makes sense because they usually know much, much more than you about what they need, that is they change all parameters to the needs of their machines and processes.

Another catch is the very sophisticated concept behind modern inkjet technology. They are not printing at the file-defined relative resolution anymore [which would mean the dots are put side by side without overlap] but at their own physical and then layered. In the case of Epson that would be 360 dpi for cheaper SOHOs and 720 dpi for high-end devices like the 2400 or 3800. The dots are then put unto each other to create smooth gradients and cover up borders and splatter.

From experience I can say that a 4 MPx camera is capable of producing photos easily printable up to A3+ [329 mm x 483 mm] without any loss or interpolation, just straight from the camera. I did and do those with an Epson 2100.
__________________
Dierk Haasis
[DH² Publishing] - Writing and Imaging

www.DH2Publishing.info
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth
  #11  
Old 06-16-2007, 02:23 PM
Noel_Carboni's Avatar
Noel_Carboni Noel_Carboni is online now
Lifetime Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 4,980
Referrals: 1
Noel_Carboni 10
Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth

"Photo quality". Heh heh heh. Try and define that.

Here I sit looking at a number of 20 x 30 prints (and a few even larger), all over my office. Some I made from ISO 100 film and my Canon A1 35mm setup. Some I made from my Canon EOS-D30 (3.1 megapixels) and later cameras.

To be very honest, the dSLR prints all look better than the film enlargements; they have more depth, better color, less grain, etc. - more "photo quality" as far as I'm concerned. Even those from the 3 megapixel camera beat the 35mm optical enlargements. My big prints from my later cameras (e.g., 10D, 20D) look more like medium format film enlargements (and this has been expressed by others as well). A couple of years ago a buddy of mine who shoots MF compared a couple of enlargements of his car, one he shot and one I shot. With a loupe we could resove more fine detail (wheel emblems, hood emblem, even a fly sitting on the car) in my print. This pushed him over the edge to go digital actually (though he went Nikon for some reason instead of Canon).

When you do good digital enlargement the chart at the top of this thread is WAY conservative.

-Noel
Attached Images
 
__________________
My eMail address: NCarboni@att.net

Last edited by Noel_Carboni : 06-16-2007 at 02:37 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth
  #12  
Old 06-17-2007, 04:09 AM
AKPhotos's Avatar
AKPhotos AKPhotos is offline
Lifetime Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Alaska
Posts: 175
Referrals: 0
AKPhotos 10
Re: Megapixel Chart explains the Megapixel Myth

One thing not considered when I wuickly read the article, and maybe I missed it, its rather late and 20 straight hours has me half asleep, but sensor size is also a big factor. For example a P&S 8 MP verse a DSLR 8MP is a big differnece in quality and noise and such. I have blown many of my old 20D files, some RAW some just Large Jpeg to 20x30, or more, and been fine, but you dont just take it from 8x12 to 20x30, you have to work the image!

I think some of the images with my new Mark 3 will blow larger than what I was doing with my 5D easier, partly because of the better color and the lower noise, esp on images shot side by side at say 800 iso, even though the 5D is a full frame and is 12.8 mp verse the 10mp of the Mark 3...

Thanks
__________________
Kevin P. in Alaska
Alaskan Photo Tours & Workshops
www.PhotoTourAlaska.com

http://akphotos.zenfolio.com/ My Photo Gallery
www.EasyVm.tv
www.Visit-Alaska.info
http://www.lifepixel.com/affiliate/i...ate.php?id=203 Awesome IR Conversions!

Canon 1Ds & 1D Mark 3 , 30D dedicated IR , Film=EOS 1N & 3, 17-40 L, 24-105 IS L, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 50mm F1.2 L, 180mm F3.5 L Macro, 100-400 L IS, 500mm F4.5 L, 14mm 2.8 Tamron SP
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Pro Photo Store and B&H

Visit the B&H Pro Photo Store for the best Gear Prices and regular specials!

Brilliant Color for any Digital SLR
White Balance Cap
The Pros Agree on ColorRight
What People Are Saying


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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

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

LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.prophotohome.com/forum/digital-photography-accessories-technology/71266-megapixel-chart-explains-megapixel-myth.html
Posted By For Type Date
Pro Photo Home Forums This thread Refback 10-09-2006 12:15 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:09 PM.





ColorRight

Pro Photo Store

Professional Photo Resources Atlanta






Geo Visitors Map

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0