Martin Loc: Long Island NY

How do you consistently get a resolution of 300 or more using a dslr camera?

BebuLamar

1. consistently print smaller than a certain size depending the number of pixels your camera has. For example if your camera is 24MP then the long side of the image is less then 20" and the short side is less than 13".
2. If you don't print then using monitor that has higher resolution than 300 (but they are few except those for cell phones). Typical monitor is only about 120.

Martin Loc: Long Island NY

My Nikon D7000 is 16 megapixels,, using Photo shop elements I can find out how big a print I can print by editoring and going to image size, but I do not think it is always correct.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I have several prints hanging in my store taken with the D7000 and printed at 24x36, they look wonderful even when you feel like sticking your nose right up to them. You have a great camera there.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

The resolution does not change unless you change it. In adobe just make sure the resample image is UNCHECKED. In Corel Paintshop pro, just select the image size to print, the resolution does not change. Your camera has 4,928 x 3,262 pixels which is 16075mp at 300 resolution. This is 16.43 inches x 10.87 inches. (divide the ppi by 300 to get pic size) If you change the inch size to print, the image is resized without changing the resolution.

Here is an article by Adobe that is easy to understand https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/image-size-resolution.html

And one by Photography Life (more in depth) https://photographylife.com/camera-resolution-explained/

SS319

We need to consider the resolution of the lens we use, and the sensor in the camera and the capabilities of the printer. Each resolution has its own meaning and its own way for figuring out the resolution. All three plus the Post Processing will factor into the final system resolution. Your camera sensor lists resolution in Mega Pixels , computer images are in pixel per inch (or mm), printers measure it in dots per inch and lenses measure resolution in line pairs per inch (or mm). The total system resolution will be less than the lowest value from each of the components.

There are charts - Cornell has(OOPS - HAD) a great vector drawing chart that you can have had printed and then photograph it, process it and print it. the first print of the vector drawing should be on a large format very high quality printer as every reproduction reduces the resolution

I have that drawing if you need it - PM me with your email and I will send it.

SS319

The chart is an ISO 12233

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

You are right. There are a lot more factors involved. But I think what he wanted to know was how to keep his 300 res pic at 300. when printing, and I was trying to be very basic for printing purposes. Maybe I was not. And yes you have to do a trial print to make sure it is the way you want, as the monitor will not do that.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You may want to read this before deciding what resolution you need to make a print.

http://www.photokaboom.com/photography/learn/printing/resolution/1_which_resolution_print_size_viewing_distance.htm

It relates resolution requirements to print size, viewing distance, eye sight, etc. And will explain why I was able to print and sell full, uncropped images from my 6.1mp D70S and no one complained about soft images. It also explains why you can view a billboard of an image taken with an iPhone camera, or a Sony UHD 4K screen at your local multiplex on a giant screen and it looks sharp even though it is only 8.8 mp.

Your camera has 4,928 x 3,264. For a 4x6 print, you will need 313 ppi. Your camera produces an image that would have about 820 ppi. So you either have extra pixels to allow for some cropping, or you can print more detail than can be actually seen at an 11" viewing distance.

If you were to calculate the ppi needed for a 40x60 you would "need" a minimum of 32 ppi. That means that you only "need" 1280x1920 pixels to make an image that size appear "acceptably" sharp at a "normal" viewing distance of about 9 ft. If you anticipate photographers looking at your images, then be prepared to quadruple your ppi, or more, since the have this nasty habit of walking up to a giant print and examining it with a loupe.

Martin Loc: Long Island NY

Thank you...

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

It's accurate.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Res it up. Photoshop is very good at interpolating a resolution up as long as you don't go overboard.

Clapperboard

Er, I don't want to seem picky, but when talking of lenses you surely mean 'RESOLVING POWER' not resolution. The lens has nothing to do with the resolution of the image. The resolving power of the lens affects the sharpness of the image etc. Resolving power also affects the clarity of lines in the image that are very close together. Lack of resolving power in a lens can sometimes mean lines that are close together blend together because the lens cannot define the gap.

PhotosBySteve

By restricting the print size to less than or equal to the maximum size print at 300dpi.
eg: for a 12MP sensor size the max print size would be roughly 9"x13.5" (rounded down).
A standard 8"x10" print would print well from a 12MP sensor size. If NOT Cropped!
Any time a photo is cropped in post you throw away pixels, which reduces to the maximum print size.
In order to get larger prints at a native 300dpi would require a larger sensor. The sensor size in Megapixels would have to be quadrupled in order to double the size of the print.

You can also cheat, so-to-speak, by up sizing in a program such as photoshop. Which will interpolate the image by increasing the maximum size by adding pixels (copying adjacent pixels) to maintain high resolution. I don't use this method and do not recommend it.

As a print enlarges past max size for 300dpi, it is not necessary to maintain 300dpi. The resolution of say a 20"x30" print, could be as low as 240dpi, and still look very good at the proper viewing distance. A billboard could be as low as 50dpi or less.

Another technique that can be used with any camera to increase possible print size and resolution, is to take matrix shots, or muliple shot panoramas with the camera in portrait perspective, and than stitch the images together in post. I use these two methods quite a bit with landscapes to produce large prints. I personally use a tilt-shift type lens to accomplish this most of the time, to minimize the loss of pixels in post stitching. I even use these techniques with my 42MP camera.

Keep in mind, when stitching images side by side, the file size increases by a multiple of the number of shots stitched together.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Photoshop's method works great as long as you go in small steps.
I had a little 500x400 picture at 100 ppi that a Client wanted for a 14"x20" glass printing. I'm always leery of glass because I find that it shows imperfections even better than the best photo paper.
First I changed the resolution to 300 ppi with resampling on. Then I kept increasing the size in Photoshop in increments of 5 px. Yeah, it took a little while to get up to a 20"x14", and I knew the picture was distorted slightly from its original 5"x4", but I was the only one who knew that; average person, perhaps even a photography expert, could not detect the distortion since it was a flower. Client was extraordinarily happy, as was Client's wife, and I made $499 on my labor and printing costs. Well worth the exercise and the happy Client.