IQ= Image Quality? I would just like to start off by saying that for the past couple weeks i have been baffled by what IQ had anything to do with taking pictures. Who cares how...

mariposa84 Loc: Rochester NY

I would just like to start off by saying that for the past couple weeks i have been baffled by what IQ had anything to do with taking pictures. Who cares how intelligent someone is this isn't a genius forum its a photography forum. So i did a search on this forum to see if i could get this explained to me. If my new understanding is correct IQ stands for Image Quality. This however opens up some rather dumb questions i'm afraid (my "IQ" is NOT genius status). I understand what the words "Image Quality" mean, a picture that is either good or bad. Is this like the overall standard? IE: the dof is spot on, the noise level almost nonexistent, the lighting just right all of this leading to a great IQ. Or is there something else that i'm missing that helps give me a picture with a high IQ? I appreciate your time and considerate replies.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

mariposa84 wrote:

I would just like to start off by saying that for ... (show quote)

All these abbreviations can drive you crazy, can't they? I think IQ, as in Image Quality, refers not so much to an individual photograph as it does to the ability of a camera or lens to take a good picture. For example, Camera A or Lens B might not have very good image quality regardless how good the photographer is. You need a certain level of equipment to get great quality - focus, color, etc. That's the excuse we all use for "upgrading."

mariposa84 Loc: Rochester NY

jerryc41 wrote:

All these abbreviations can drive you crazy, can't they? I think IQ, as in Image Quality, refers not so much to an individual photograph as it does to the ability of a camera or lens to take a good picture. For example, Camera A or Lens B might not have very good image quality regardless how good the photographer is. You need a certain level of equipment to get great quality - focus, color, etc. That's the excuse we all use for "upgrading."

Haha Thank you so much for your helpful response, I really appreciate it.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

jerryc41 wrote:

All these abbreviations can drive you crazy, can't they? I think IQ, as in Image Quality, refers not so much to an individual photograph as it does to the ability of a camera or lens to take a good picture. For example, Camera A or Lens B might not have very good image quality regardless how good the photographer is. You need a certain level of equipment to get great quality - focus, color, etc. That's the excuse we all use for "upgrading."

Jerry, you're a card-carrying MENSA member aren't you ?!?! SS

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

That's the number one reason people buy cameras, so they can take "nice pictures" or "high image quality". A lot of factors go into a cameras ability to take good pictures. So I guess you can also say...if a camera is "intelligent", it will give you good image quality. When you read a professional review about a certain camera, there's always something in the review about "image quality"...how far you can crop it before you degrade the image.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

SharpShooter wrote:

Jerry, you're a card-carrying MENSA member aren't you ?!?! SS

I think so, but I keep forgetting where I put it.

No, actually I'm not a member of Mensa. I was one point short of their IQ requirement. :D

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_abbreviations_in_photography

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

jerryc41 wrote:

I think so, but I keep forgetting where I put it.

No, actually I'm not a member of Mensa. I was one point short of their IQ requirement. :D

Jerry, too bad.
Once, the door had been left slightly ajar, and I sneaked in.
I was of course caught. But, under the threat of mayhem, I said, " I snuck in, duh!".
I was promptly exorcised from the room.
Jerry, what do you think gave it away?
Was it the use of the word, "snuck", or was it the, "duh" ?!!
PS, my camera was also around my neck.
SS

FredB Loc: A little below the Mason-Dixon line.

A thing to remember about the general use of the "IQ" acronym is that it is applied solely to the TECHNICAL quality of an image, not the artistic value - any image can have great IQ but be a total piece of crap from an artistic point of view, and conversely, a really great picture can have just mediocre IQ.

So IQ is used as a measure of the optical quality of an image, and has been noted, is usually used to evaluate a lens or lens/body combination. For a specific example, a review might find that at certain apertures or certain focal lengths, a lens will produce visible purple fringing, which would obviously detract from IQ.

JPL

Yes, this is IQ explained. It is about the technical part of the image, not the artist part of it.

FredB wrote:

A thing to remember about the general use of the &... (show quote)

mariposa84 Loc: Rochester NY

JR1 wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_abbreviations_in_photography

thank you for that link... However, did you notice the definition it gave for IQ??? I QUOTE "Image quality. An informal abbreviation used in discussion forums. Usually subjective, though some studies have analysed mathematically quantifiable components of image quality." I don't want you to walk away calling me an idiot but Seriously this definition does ABSOLUTELY nothing for me. I much prefer the kind responses that Jerry and the rest have taken the time to expound on this topic for me. However i am grateful that there is somewhere i can go to get photography abbreviations quickly... so for that I thank you very much.

mariposa84 Loc: Rochester NY

cjkorb wrote:

That's the number one reason people buy cameras, so they can take "nice pictures" or "high image quality". A lot of factors go into a cameras ability to take good pictures. So I guess you can also say...if a camera is "intelligent", it will give you good image quality. When you read a professional review about a certain camera, there's always something in the review about "image quality"...how far you can crop it before you degrade the image.

Thank you for your time to help me understand this.

mariposa84 Loc: Rochester NY

JPL wrote:

Yes, this is IQ explained. It is about the technical part of the image, not the artist part of it.

Thank you for helping me out.

mariposa84 Loc: Rochester NY

FredB wrote:

A thing to remember about the general use of the &... (show quote)

I appreciate greatly this clarification.

mariposa84 Loc: Rochester NY

SharpShooter wrote:

Jerry, too bad.
Once, the door had been left slightly ajar, and I sneaked in.
I was of course caught. But, under the threat of mayhem, I said, " I snuck in, duh!".
I was promptly exorcised from the room.
Jerry, what do you think gave it away?
Was it the use of the word, "snuck", or was it the, "duh" ?!!
PS, my camera was also around my neck.
SS

Could have been worse you could have said "snucked" :P