Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Canon in cameera picture size
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Oct 8, 2019 07:18:54   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
dpullum wrote:
Chuckwilly Do not crop in the camera... use all the sensor real estate you paid for. Once on your 50" HDTV monitor you can realistically crop to the story. Viewing a 3" screen or eye view does not give you enough info. Always take your photos with too much view and crop later... you have the resolution for good end results for 8x10 prints. If you need more resolution use Photozoom or On-1 and get fine jackup resolution. [NO, PS and LR are not that good]

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 08:05:55   #
khorinek
 
clickety wrote:
The camera’s image size and dimensions are determined by the sensor. The most common aspect ratio being 3x2. An image must then be cropped to to achieve a different ratio ( 4x5, square, etc..) for printing. Some Canons will display a grid in the viewfinder to help you pre-visualize the shot in a different ratio, but the uncropped image will still be 3x2 aspect. If you want to print 8x10 you’ll still have to crop to 8x10.


Well explained.

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 09:09:00   #
bleirer
 
dpullum wrote:
Chuckwilly Do not crop in the camera... use all the sensor real estate you paid for. Once on your 50" HDTV monitor you can realistically crop to the story. Viewing a 3" screen or eye view does not give you enough info. Always take your photos with too much view and crop later... you have the resolution for good end results for 8x10 prints. If you need more resolution use Photozoom or On-1 and get fine jackup resolution. [NO, PS and LR are not that good]


Resampling in Photoshop is quite good in the up to date version, at least in the few I've done.

Reply
 
 
Oct 8, 2019 09:46:24   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
bleirer wrote:
Resampling in Photoshop is quite good in the up to date version, at least in the few I've done.


Your comment caused me to look at the specs for a 50-inch 4K UHD TV. It really isn't important how big the TV is when measured in "inches" or "centimeters", etc. What you need to know is the pixel resolution. The Samsung site and the manual quotes 2160p, where this advertised 2160-pixels refers to the vertical side, aka the short side, of the image.

So what does this information mean to the digital photographer?

a) It means your uncropped 24MP image (6000x4000p) is almost twice as high vertically as can fit on this 50-inch 4K Ultra High Definition (UHD) TV.

b) It means if you resize your 24MP image to match the short-size pixel resolution, your image would be 3240x2160px at a 3:2 aspect ratio.

c) This particular Samsung appears to be a 16:9 aspect, where if you resize your image to perfectly fit the pixel resolution of the screen, you'd have a 3840x2160 image.

So the take away is that your run-of-the-mill 24MP digital image doesn't have to be resampled for full-screen display on a 50-inch 4K UHD television. In fact, this $329 TV at Best Buy doesn't have the pixel resolution needed to show the original 24MP image at the full 100% resolution of the image file / camera sensor.

To understand more about pixel resolution and digital images, please refer to the presentation at this link: Recommended resizing parameters for digital images

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 10:20:04   #
bleirer
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Your comment caused me to look at the specs for a 50-inch 4K UHD TV. It really isn't important how big the TV is when measured in "inches" or "centimeters", etc. What you need to know is the pixel resolution. The Samsung site and the manual quotes 2160p, where this advertised 2160-pixels refers to the vertical side, aka the short side, of the image.

So what does this information mean to the digital photographer?

a) It means your uncropped 24MP image (6000x4000p) is almost twice as high vertically as can fit on this 50-inch 4K Ultra High Definition (UHD) TV.

b) It means if you resize your 24MP image to match the short-size pixel resolution, your image would be 3240x2160px at a 3:2 aspect ratio.

c) This particular Samsung appears to be a 16:9 aspect, where if you resize your image to perfectly fit the pixel resolution of the screen, you'd have a 3840x2160 image.

So the take away is that your run-of-the-mill 24MP digital image doesn't have to be resampled for full-screen display on a 50-inch 4K UHD television. In fact, this $329 TV at Best Buy doesn't have the pixel resolution needed to show the original 24MP image at the full 100% resolution of the image file / camera sensor.

To understand more about pixel resolution and digital images, please refer to the presentation at this link: Recommended resizing parameters for digital images
Your comment caused me to look at the specs for a ... (show quote)


I was just responding to the other poster that said Photoshop was no good for upsizing.

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 10:44:05   #
clickety
 
Linda From Maine wrote:
Only the raw. There are in-camera settings for changing aspect ratio when shooting jpg. For example, the T7i can do 4:3, 16:9, 1:1

OP needs to check user manual and/or tell us which Canon it is.


Thank you for pointing this out. I guess I reflexively default to raw and certainly replied before thinking. My apologies to the OP and other readers.

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 10:46:28   #
dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida
 
bleirer wrote:
I was just responding to the other poster that said Photoshop was no good for upsizing.


Here Topaz Gigapixel is winner
http://plugsandpixels.com/blog/topaz-a-i-gigapixel-vs-ps-on1-more-tests/

Three Best for 2019... here PS did not make the cut:
https://reapon.com/photo-enlargement-software/

The three best are Wondershare photo enlarging software, ON1 Resize, and BenVista Photozoom 7
I have Photozoom 6 down priced because 7 is the new one... sold by Ashampoo for $20

Reply
 
 
Oct 8, 2019 13:41:55   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
chuckwilly wrote:
Is there a way to set the camera for 4x5 or if not what is the best setting if you need to make a lot of 8x10 photos?


I'm sure you are referring to the "aspect ratio" of the images taken by the camera.

Some Canon have means of changing their native 3:2 aspect ratio to others, such as 5:4 (not 4x5). But many models don't give you this option. It's mostly just the high-end, full frame DSLRs and the full frame mirrorless (R-series) that have user-selectable aspect ratios. Some Canon can display a grid in the viewfinder and/or on the rear LCD screen to help with some of the optional aspect ratios.

If your camera doesn't have those features, simply shoot the native 3:2, make some allowance for cropping and crop the image later in post-processing.

There really is no "perfect" aspect ratio. 3:2 is the standard for many cameras, but some use others... Such as Olympus/Panasonic with 4:3 (more similar to, but not quite the same as 5:4).

A 3:2 aspect ratio allows the full image to be printed 4x6", 6x9", 8x12", 10x15", 12x18", 13x19", 18x24", 24x36" and so on.

A 5:4 aspect ratio equates to a print 4x5", 8x10", 16x20", 24x30" and so on.

There are a number of standard print sizes in between the typically used aspect ratios, such as 3.5x5", 5x7", 11x14", 20x24", etc.

If you use a standard print size, you'll be able to find lower-cost, pre-cut mats and ready-made frames. Custom made mats and frames typically cost 3X to 6X more than ready-made.

Even though they have means of changing the aspect ratio, I've never done so with my Canon cameras. I shoot with 3:2 all the time and later crop the image in post processing to a different aspect ratio, if it's appropriate for the particular image. I've also got a background in the matting and framing business, so have a pretty good idea of what print sizes to use... and which to avoid, unless absolutely necessary!

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 13:59:41   #
Kozan Loc: Trenton Tennessee
 
chuckwilly wrote:
Is there a way to set the camera for 4x5 or if not what is the best setting if you need to make a lot of 8x10 photos?


I am pretty sure the Canon 80D has a 4x5 format. Unfortunely, my Nikon D850 does not.
Consult your manual.

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 15:07:23   #
DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina
 
Shoot in 3:2, in pp size to 8x12, or 4x6, and crop to 8x10, or 4x5.

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 16:17:23   #
lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA
 
WILLARD98407 wrote:
if it's a 4x5 Linhof, you're all set. Canon, I'm not sure. which Canon?




or a Omega 45F or Gundlach 4x5" in my case.

Perhaps a "cannon".

Reply
 
 
Oct 8, 2019 16:27:07   #
lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA
 
chuckwilly wrote:
Is there a way to set the camera for 4x5 or if not what is the best setting if you need to make a lot of 8x10 photos?


Yikes, that is a 4:5 or 2:2.5 ratio. Not a modern ratio like 2:3, or even 6:7 or 3:4. Just allow enough of space to crop to say 8x12" to 8x10". No way I know of to get an automatic 4:5 in a digital camera. Some are natively or can be set to 3:4. Typically P&S, Bridge, or SmartPhones, and a few DSLRs and MILCs offer it as I said as an alternate crop. But 4:5, perhaps on a Digital Medium Format Camera for $10-$45K !

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 16:34:23   #
khorinek
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Your comment caused me to look at the specs for a 50-inch 4K UHD TV. It really isn't important how big the TV is when measured in "inches" or "centimeters", etc. What you need to know is the pixel resolution. The Samsung site and the manual quotes 2160p, where this advertised 2160-pixels refers to the vertical side, aka the short side, of the image.

So what does this information mean to the digital photographer?

a) It means your uncropped 24MP image (6000x4000p) is almost twice as high vertically as can fit on this 50-inch 4K Ultra High Definition (UHD) TV.

b) It means if you resize your 24MP image to match the short-size pixel resolution, your image would be 3240x2160px at a 3:2 aspect ratio.

c) This particular Samsung appears to be a 16:9 aspect, where if you resize your image to perfectly fit the pixel resolution of the screen, you'd have a 3840x2160 image.

So the take away is that your run-of-the-mill 24MP digital image doesn't have to be resampled for full-screen display on a 50-inch 4K UHD television. In fact, this $329 TV at Best Buy doesn't have the pixel resolution needed to show the original 24MP image at the full 100% resolution of the image file / camera sensor.

To understand more about pixel resolution and digital images, please refer to the presentation at this link: Recommended resizing parameters for digital images
Your comment caused me to look at the specs for a ... (show quote)


Trying to fit today's digital images to a modern digital TV can be difficult at best. Most digital TV's are 16:9 aspect ratio. Most photographers shoot in 3:2 aspect ratio. As you can see these two ratios do not match. You have heard that TV adds 10 pounds to a person's "look". The aspect ratio is what causes this, even if so slightly. When I post photos for our TV station, I crop them to 16:9 to avoid cutting off someone's head or worse.

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 16:46:43   #
DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina
 
lamiaceae wrote:
Yikes, that is a 4:5 or 2:2.5 ratio. Not a modern ratio like 2:3, or even 6:7 or 3:4. Just allow enough of space to crop to say 8x12" to 8x10". No way I know of to get an automatic 4:5 in a digital camera. Some are natively or can be set to 3:4. Typically P&S, Bridge, or SmartPhones, and a few DSLRs and MILCs offer it as I said as an alternate crop. But 4:5, perhaps on a Digital Medium Format Camera for $10-$45K !
recall

I had an Oly E3 that had several aspect ratio selections, including 4x5, 1x1, and 6x7, as I recall. Great camera, wish I still owned it.

Reply
Oct 8, 2019 16:57:28   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
khorinek wrote:
Trying to fit today's digital images to a modern digital TV can be difficult at best. Most digital TV's are 16:9 aspect ratio. Most photographers shoot in 3:2 aspect ratio. As you can see these two ratios do not match. You have heard that TV adds 10 pounds to a person's "look". The aspect ratio is what causes this, even if so slightly. When I post photos for our TV station, I crop them to 16:9 to avoid cutting off someone's head or worse.


I hope this was a joke? The requisite was missing ...

When you resize on the long side based on the max long side of the monitor / TV / phone, measured in pixels, the image fills the entire 16:9 screen for an image that starts from a 16:9 crop, whether to pixels in the image match or exceeds the pixel resolution of the screen. Or, for 3:2 crops, a small amount of margin space occurs on the left & right sides of the 3:2 image. Modern high-def equipment will dynamically resize the digital image on the smaller side of the image, as needed, to fit to the screen display. The images are not cropped to fit to the screen, cutting off heads, etc. The images are not squished to fit into the screen, adding pounds, etc.

If you should think otherwise, we'll have a few in the follow-up discussion, even if you think so only slightly. The relevant technical details were discussed and demonstrated with actual images in this prior post: Recommended resizing parameters for digital images

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.