Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Meapixel count-quality-personal needs
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
Apr 11, 2024 16:50:12   #
BebuLamar
 
Rongnongno wrote:
Extend on this, please.


I don't know how much a tilt shift lens can shift and in how many directions. But if you can shift it all the way up take a picture then shift it all the way down and take another then shift all the way to the right then left then stitch the 4 images you would get more pixels. Don't know how many more though.

Reply
Apr 11, 2024 16:50:42   #
User ID
 
Rongnongno wrote:
Extend on this, please.


Shift and stitch.

BTW youre six monthes late to the party.

Reply
Apr 12, 2024 07:08:16   #
Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC
 
Join me for a fish dinner, I love people. Walk closer.

More mega pixels may be less expensive than purchasing multiple focal lengths and perhaps wiser monetarily, but for too many I believe it is also a form of laziness. Relying on a sensor stuffed with small but plentiful pixels to reduce legwork or composure skills is more picture taking than producing a quality image.

For me I prefer composure and avoid cropping as much as possible. I take my time and use skills that have developed over time to get the image I see when I compose from the start.

Simple math will tell you what you need to know when choosing pixel density. An example is 20 megapixel sensors will print images to 21.9x 14.6, and 100 mpxls will print to 49x 32.6. that's what they say but there is more...

The truth is that your lens also plays a big part in the outcome. I print regularly to 60 inches wide at 50 mega pixels using a TSE lens. I recently printed at that resolution with detail so fine you can see people holding their cell phone in the deepest part of a landscape image nearly two mile away.

Pixel density is less important than pixel quality, spacing and pitch. 9 times out of ten most are reducing the size of their image for social media plus never print large. You could do well with 10 megapixels if you do not crop or print big.

The result and use of your image is all that maters, so understanding pixel overkill is possible, plus the fact that you can achieve more with composure and good glass might be something more important to think about.

any image edited under two-feet wide means a 20 mega pixel sensor will be more than enough. Additionally a tilt shift lens can turn your 20 mega pixels into 50 in under a minute, an option mostly ignored.

One of the best learning methods to consider is to use only one fixed focal length each day for a week and force yourself to move forward and back to compose regardless of look vs focal length.

Understanding composure, practice, a good lenses and avoiding being a picture taker will be much more valuable than purchasing a 100 megapixel camera body that will most likely slow down your computer... and eventually be reduced to 6 mega pixels for things like magazine or social media needs...

The horse is not quite dead yet i will assume...[/quote]



Reply
 
 
Apr 12, 2024 07:13:26   #
Nortfish Loc: Port St. Lucie, Fla
 
Architect1776 wrote:
You obviously have never been in fluid and action situations where moving with your feet is not possible or you fall off a cliff.
And I take it that you have infinitely long lenses so that is not an issue for you.
Us mere mortals do not have infinitely long lenses or can fly in the air over a cliff or are invisible to skittish or dangerous subjects.


Totally agree. This "crop with your feet" concept is 90% B.S.

Reply
Apr 12, 2024 07:25:41   #
BebuLamar
 
Bultaco wrote:
Join me for a fish dinner, I love people. Walk closer.

More mega pixels may be less expensive than purchasing multiple focal lengths and perhaps wiser monetarily, but for too many I believe it is also a form of laziness. Relying on a sensor stuffed with small but plentiful pixels to reduce legwork or composure skills is more picture taking than producing a quality image.

For me I prefer composure and avoid cropping as much as possible. I take my time and use skills that have developed over time to get the image I see when I compose from the start.

Simple math will tell you what you need to know when choosing pixel density. An example is 20 megapixel sensors will print images to 21.9x 14.6, and 100 mpxls will print to 49x 32.6. that's what they say but there is more...

The truth is that your lens also plays a big part in the outcome. I print regularly to 60 inches wide at 50 mega pixels using a TSE lens. I recently printed at that resolution with detail so fine you can see people holding their cell phone in the deepest part of a landscape image nearly two mile away.

Pixel density is less important than pixel quality, spacing and pitch. 9 times out of ten most are reducing the size of their image for social media plus never print large. You could do well with 10 megapixels if you do not crop or print big.

The result and use of your image is all that maters, so understanding pixel overkill is possible, plus the fact that you can achieve more with composure and good glass might be something more important to think about.

any image edited under two-feet wide means a 20 mega pixel sensor will be more than enough. Additionally a tilt shift lens can turn your 20 mega pixels into 50 in under a minute, an option mostly ignored.

One of the best learning methods to consider is to use only one fixed focal length each day for a week and force yourself to move forward and back to compose regardless of look vs focal length.

Understanding composure, practice, a good lenses and avoiding being a picture taker will be much more valuable than purchasing a 100 megapixel camera body that will most likely slow down your computer... and eventually be reduced to 6 mega pixels for things like magazine or social media needs...

The horse is not quite dead yet i will assume...
Join me for a fish dinner, I love people. Walk clo... (show quote)
[/quote]

Why do you use the the term "Composure"? You meant stay calm and get close to the bear?

Reply
Apr 12, 2024 07:55:05   #
BebuLamar
 
Nortfish wrote:
Totally agree. This "crop with your feet" concept is 90% B.S.


Even if it's possible getting close and cropping or using long lens from far away yield totally different images. You have to do both depending on what you need.

Reply
Apr 13, 2024 14:10:55   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
BebuLamar wrote:
What do you mean by "composure"? You mean it's better being calm than cropping? I don't understand.


I think he means understanding composition.

Reply
 
 
Apr 13, 2024 21:49:03   #
Harry02 Loc: Gardena, CA
 
imagextrordinair wrote:
It is true there are ways to gain flexibility in your photo editing, like for cropping.

More mega pixels may be less expensive than purchasing multiple focal lengths and perhaps wiser monetarily, but for too many I believe it is also a form of laziness. Relying on a sensor stuffed with small but plentiful pixels to reduce legwork or composure skills is more picture taking than producing a quality image.

For me I prefer composure and avoid cropping as much as possible. I take my time and use skills that have developed over time to get the image I see when I compose from the start.

Simple math will tell you what you need to know when choosing pixel density. An example is 20 megapixel sensors will print images to 21.9x 14.6, and 100 mpxls will print to 49x 32.6. that's what they say but there is more...

The truth is that your lens also plays a big part in the outcome. I print regularly to 60 inches wide at 50 mega pixels using a TSE lens. I recently printed at that resolution with detail so fine you can see people holding their cell phone in the deepest part of a landscape image nearly two mile away.

Pixel density is less important than pixel quality, spacing and pitch. 9 times out of ten most are reducing the size of their image for social media plus never print large. You could do well with 10 megapixels if you do not crop or print big.

The result and use of your image is all that maters, so understanding pixel overkill is possible, plus the fact that you can achieve more with composure and good glass might be something more important to think about.

any image edited under two-feet wide means a 20 mega pixel sensor will be more than enough. Additionally a tilt shift lens can turn your 20 mega pixels into 50 in under a minute, an option mostly ignored.

One of the best learning methods to consider is to use only one fixed focal length each day for a week and force yourself to move forward and back to compose regardless of look vs focal length.

Understanding composure, practice, a good lenses and avoiding being a picture taker will be much more valuable than purchasing a 100 megapixel camera body that will most likely slow down your computer... and eventually be reduced to 6 mega pixels for things like magazine or social media needs...

The horse is not quite dead yet i will assume...
It is true there are ways to gain flexibility in y... (show quote)


Kinda sorta segue thang ....
I used to shoot meedium format.
I took a picture of my youngest bowing out a candle, 1st bday, in almost dark
Waay better than the left were the grandparents, their 1st grandkid.
I could/did an extra print of just the 3 of them. They framed *that* one.
I had also made a cropped print of just me, ma and kid. Kid still has that one.
I take photos mostly to make and create memories. Good cropping is essential.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
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.