IR image size: Recently I've bought Panasonic Lumix ZS19 with a full spectrum IR conversion in order to experiment with IR photography. It's a 14 MP camera but my IR images from it are...

IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD

Recently I've bought Panasonic Lumix ZS19 with a full spectrum IR conversion in order to experiment with IR photography. It's a 14 MP camera but my IR images from it are only around 5 MP at the highest setting. I am confused about this MP discrepancy. Would this be related to IR or is there something wrong with the camera.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Do you mean the files are 5 megabytes?
Really like your Nightlight photos.

Thanks for putting the complete address in your signature.
So many people have a non-working link.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

You'll notice a difference in file sizes of many images. For example, something with a lot of blue sky will be smaller than a very detailed scene.

IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD

Sorry, yes that's what I meant.

GoofyNewfie wrote:

Do you mean the files are 5 megabytes?

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

deleted - Goofy Newfie and I were answering at the same time :)

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

IzzyKap wrote:

Sorry, yes that's what I meant.

Megapixels and megabytes are two different things.
Megapixels relate to resolution.
Megabytes are the image file size and can vary depending upon the file format (raw, jpeg, tif), image content and compression.
Being infrared may make a difference as well.

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

While your camera may have a 14 MP sensor, It's finished product is a compressed Jpg image. The 14MP raw image is developed (processed) in camera and saved in the JPG. Format.

IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD

I realize that but what was confusing me is that my 22 MP DSLR yielded around 22 MB images while my 14 MP P&S IR only yielded 5 MB images. However, the DSLR images were raw files while P&S were jpg files, which could account for the difference, I guess.

GoofyNewfie wrote:

Megapixels and megabytes are two different things.
Megapixels relate to resolution.
Megabytes are the image file size and can vary depending upon the file format (raw, jpeg, tif), image content and compression.
Being infrared may make a difference as well.

IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD

Yea, I've just realized it. Thanks all.

letmedance wrote:

While your camera may have a 14 MP sensor, It's finished product is a compressed Jpg image. The 14MP raw image is developed (processed) in camera and saved in the JPG. Format.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

IzzyKap wrote:

I realize that but what was confusing me is that my 22 MP DSLR yielded around 22 MB images while my 14 MP P&S IR only yielded 5 MB images. However, the DSLR images were raw files while P&S were jpg files, which could account for the difference, I guess.

Would like to see one if you can attach and "store original"
I haven't shot infrared since the '70's.

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

IzzyKap wrote:

I realize that but what was confusing me is that my 22 MP DSLR yielded around 22 MB images while my 14 MP P&S IR only yielded 5 MB images. However, the DSLR images were raw files while P&S were jpg files, which could account for the difference, I guess.

JPEG, at it's highest quality setting, has a compression ratio of about 2.5:1
Lower quality settings increase that ratio.

IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD

I've attached one which was obtained with a 720 nm IR filter.

GoofyNewfie wrote:

Would like to see one if you can attach and "store original"
I haven't shot infrared since the '70's.

IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD

That makes me sense in terms what I was seeing. Thanks.

Wall-E wrote:

JPEG, at it's highest quality setting, has a compression ratio of about 2.5:1
Lower quality settings increase that ratio.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

IzzyKap wrote:

Yea, I've just realized it. Thanks all.

Izzy, though I don't know much about it, do keep in mind that most of the IR converted cameras are older and likely to be using sensors and processors that run very low bit outputs. I would be inclined to think that a modern camera recording at 14 bit(higher?) would produce a file much, much bigger than one running at only 8 bits or lower. Just the number of color hues alone is going to be big. Compare that to an IR that has only grey scale, and possibly mostly a lot of pure black or pure white.
But again, those way smarter than me will have to fill in the blanks, since I know very little about it.
Happy IR'n.
SS

IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD

Thanks Sharp Shooter. Right now I am just playing with P&S IR to see if I want to invest in an IR DSLR. I've been mainly using 720 nm filter thus far and have just ordered a 590 nm filter for more experimentation.

SharpShooter wrote:

Izzy, though I don't know much about it, do keep i... (show quote)