Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Question #1 MegaPixels
Page <prev 2 of 6 next> last>>
Jul 17, 2017 06:52:29   #
stevetassi
 
I have a 36 x 48 canvas taken with a 6MP camera and it looks great. Unless you do a lot of cropping, large MP is not necessary.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 07:08:37   #
Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
 
selmslie wrote:
Because what you said is irrelevant when you don't take into account viewing distance.

Put your calculator down and use some common sense.

There is no printer available that prints at 80 PPI. Not one.

Do use common sense!

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 07:21:44   #
Kites
 
Will a higher mega pixel camera give better results when cropping the picture? In other words being able to crop more without loosing detail?

Reply
 
 
Jul 17, 2017 07:27:36   #
Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
 
Kites wrote:
Will a higher mega pixel camera give better results when cropping the picture? In other words being able to crop more without loosing detail?

Yes.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 07:28:01   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
Kites wrote:
Will a higher mega pixel camera give better results when cropping the picture? In other words being able to crop more without loosing detail?


Yes to better results, not best results.

It is even better to avoid excess cropping by using your feet and the right lens to get the image you want in the viewfinder before pressing the shutter button.

--

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 07:31:09   #
Kites
 
Thanks. I just wanted to know. I do my composing with the lens as much as possible.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 07:38:45   #
Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
 
Kites wrote:
Thanks. I just wanted to know. I do my composing with the lens as much as possible.

Understand that using your feet changes the perspective. Changing focal length is what changes framing. Cropping changes the resolution if blown up to the same size.

Each has its place and effects on composition, but each are different

Reply
 
 
Jul 17, 2017 07:42:42   #
BobU Loc: Sarasota Florida
 
The higher megapixel cameras allow you to crop your image down to a smaller portion of the entire frame, while still preserving a high enough pixel density to give an acceptable print.

If you use the total sensor size in the calculation of acceptable print size, it will only apply if you compose in the frame when taking the picture and print without cropping the image. If your images contain a lot of detail, having a high pixel density will give you more flexibility.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 08:11:13   #
Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
 
BobU wrote:
The higher megapixel cameras allow you to crop your image down to a smaller portion of the entire frame, while still preserving a high enough pixel density to give an acceptable print.

If you use the total sensor size in the calculation of acceptable print size, it will only apply if you compose in the frame when taking the picture and print without cropping the image. If your images contain a lot of detail, having a high pixel density will give you more flexibility.

That is one of the advantages of say a Nikon D7200, with sensor resolution of 128 lp/mm, over a Nikon D810 with a sensor resolution of only 103 lp/mm. The D810 is better until the longest focal length lens does not put as many pixels on the subject. For wildlife photography that is not uncommon and is a reason to use an APS-C sensor.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 08:51:35   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Apaflo wrote:
There is no printer available that prints at 80 PPI. Not one.

Do use common sense!

Did I say that that? Don't make things up. Just try to understand what I wrote.

The point that Gene51 made is correct and clear to everyone else.

Whatever else happens between an image and the printer, you only need about 300 dpi resolution if you are going to look at a print from about 10 inches. At 20 inches, 150 dpi is sufficient. At 40 inches, 75 dpi is plenty. It's a simple matter of visual acuity. The eye can only resolve a limited arc.

That's why you need less than 10 MP to make any image that is going to be viewed from a normal viewing distance.

If you had any common sense you would not be arguing this.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 08:54:45   #
AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!
 
I've been told by people who are supposed to know these things that not all pixels are created equal. There is no standard for what a pixel must be nor how much info it must contain. Therefore, simply comparing quantity of pixels isn't a good measure. Those same people stated that older DSLR's had larger and better pixels than current ones - except for pro versions. What I've never been able to figure out is how can I find out the size of the pixels in the camera that's in my hand?

Now before you all start the attack on these statements, I'm quoting from information learned some years back and I have no idea the names of any of these people - just that they were put up as being people who know these things.

Reply
 
 
Jul 17, 2017 08:58:08   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
AzPicLady wrote:
I've been told by people who are supposed to know these things that not all pixels are created equal. There is no standard for what a pixel must be nor how much info it must contain. Therefore, simply comparing quantity of pixels isn't a good measure. Those same people stated that older DSLR's had larger and better pixels than current ones - except for pro versions. What I've never been able to figure out is how can I find out the size of the pixels in the camera that's in my hand?

Now before you all start the attack on these statements, I'm quoting from information learned some years back and I have no idea the names of any of these people - just that they were put up as being people who know these things.
I've been told by people who are supposed to know ... (show quote)


I would think that dividing the area of the sensor by the number of pixels would give you their size.

--

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 08:58:22   #
jmvaugh Loc: Albuquerque
 


Thank you for the links. It was helpful.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 09:06:12   #
Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska
 
selmslie wrote:
Did I say that that? Don't make things up. Just try to understand what I wrote.

The point that Gene51 made is correct and clear to everyone else.

Whatever else happens between an image and the printer, you only need about 300 dpi resolution if you are going to look at a print from about 10 inches. At 20 inches, 150 dpi is sufficient. At 40 inches, 75 dpi is plenty. It's a simple matter of visual acuity. The eye can only resolve a limited arc.

That's why you need less than 10 MP to make any image that is going to be viewed from a normal viewing distance.

If you had any common sense you would not be arguing this.
Did I say that that? Don't make things up. Just ... (show quote)

Your printer prints at 300 PPI. Not 80.

Reply
Jul 17, 2017 09:21:19   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
Apaflo wrote:
Your printer prints at 300 PPI. Not 80.


I believe what he is saying is that your input to the printer only needs to be 80 ppi. Many people interchange dpi and ppi, even in major publications.

By nit picking, you are not helping the conversation. We all know how smart you think you are. No need to constantly try to reinforce it. Most have already developed their opinion.

--

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 6 next> last>>
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.