Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > 6.3 Megapixel Print Size

Reply
Thread Tools

6.3 Megapixel Print Size

 
 
Christian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2003
Crownfield wrote:

> Christian wrote:
>>
>> takeone wrote:
>>
>> > I'm considering the Canon EOS Digital Rebel. What is the largest
>> > film-quality print that can be made from this 6.3 megapixel camera?

>>
>> This has already been answered but I'll add two points which haven't been
>> made yet.
>>
>> First, a lot of people will just tell you to divide the length and width
>> (in pixels) of the output image (3072 x 204 by 300 (or whatever dpi you
>> want to print at) to work out how big a given camera can print but this
>> is really nonsense because of the ability to rescale ("resample" or
>> "interpolate") the digital image. I doubled the size of some 10D images
>> the other day and the amount of detail it captured was quite incredible.

>
> as long as we agree that you can not upsample
> and get any more detail than you started with.


Obviously. But you can see the detail which you might not be able to
otherwise.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
VT
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2003
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:20:21 -0800, Lisa Horton <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
>
>It gets hard for me to exactly compare traditional photo enlargements to
>large inkjet prints. When looking closely at the digital print, I see
>"stuff" that doesn't look the same as the enlargement, but I'm not all
>that sure if it's the printer or the digital capture introducing or
>producing the "stuff".


I think I know what you mean - could be one of two things or even
both? -
on a good traditional optical wet print I seem to be able to see more
and more detail - ie: it just seems almost that the print has
"infinite" detail - I can take a magnifying glass to it and see more.

Whereas on a digital print from _my_ inkjet photo printer (Epson Photo
780) all the information detail seem to be "on the surface" - I don't
seem to be able to see (much) more when taking a magnifying glass to
the print - even on print where the ppi density is better than 300ppi
like 400ppi, 600ppi or even 720ppi..... (yes there is some more detail
- but not strikingly so, when compared to taking a 6x4 film optical
print and magnifying it.....)

Also another point worth considering - it bothers me - but as always
YMMV - I find that prints using "error diffusion" dot patterning
somewhat better in that the dot patterning seems more random and
closer to what we see as traditional film grain. BUT if the printer
uses rectangular patterning (like the earlier Canon Photo printers) -
the prints tend to look artificial - magazine reproduction like to my
eyes.

--
Vincent
remove CLOTHES for e-mail

http://UnknownVincent.cjb.net/
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pumpkin King
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2003
I'm pleased with the one 20" x 30" print I've had done from my D60
(don't know about ISO 1600, all my D60 pictures are iso 100 or 200 and
occasionally 400). When you get up close it looks soft, but so do
all the 35mm prints I've seen enlarged to that size (it's not medium
format). Generally for the same level of detail to my eyes, I can
print up to 11x17. Your mileage may vary.

-mg /pk


On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:35:14 GMT, "takeone"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I'm considering the Canon EOS Digital Rebel. What is the largest
>film-quality print that can be made from this 6.3 megapixel camera?
>
>Thanks,
>Take One
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
David J. Littleboy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2003

"Lisa Horton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "David J. Littleboy" wrote:
>
> It gets hard for me to exactly compare traditional photo enlargements to
> large inkjet prints. When looking closely at the digital print, I see
> "stuff" that doesn't look the same as the enlargement, but I'm not all
> that sure if it's the printer or the digital capture introducing or
> producing the "stuff". I'm only an expert on how MY prints from MY
> camera and MY printer look, but those digitally sourced prints look very
> close to enlargements, until you get very close.


Forget film for a second. I find the 1Ds samples I've downloaded
significantly better at A4 than the 6MP dSLRs.

OK, I'm a detail freak. But I like have textures and detail rendered in my
prints. To my eye, 6MP is soft at A4.

> I would think that
> "normal reading distance" would roughly equate to what I would call very
> close. When you do get that close, it doesn't look quite like an
> enlargement. I guess it's trading grain for digital "stuff". I could
> probably make better prints if I put the time and energy into becoming a
> better printer, but I don't know how much that would help the digital
> look.


FWIW, I scan MF and print on inkjet. Haven't been in a darkroom since I
dropped out of Materials Science graduate school (which I only got into
since they had the best darkrooms<g>).

> But at normal viewing distances, or even somewhat close distances, the
> layman generally cannot distinguish these 11x14/16.5 prints from
> traditional photographic enlargements.


I printed out the ISO tests at Steves for the 1Ds at ISO 100, the 300D at
ISO 100, and the 300D at ISO 1600, all at A4, and showed them to our CEO.
She said: they all look the same...

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Megapixel to Print size questions and Fractal Print Pro curiosities... chumpy Digital Photography 3 11-09-2005 10:05 AM
Sigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLRSigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLR sigmaphotojapan@yahoo.com Digital Photography 6 04-01-2005 05:26 PM
Sigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLRSigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLR sigmaphotojapan@yahoo.com Digital Photography 5 04-01-2005 02:08 PM
5 Megapixel VS. 4 Megapixel camera Mark Digital Photography 13 03-09-2005 04:06 PM
The Human Eye: 120 Megapixel Monochrome, 6 Megapixel Color Brian C. Baird Digital Photography 44 06-17-2004 06:12 PM



Advertisments