Interpolated pixels e.g. 2MP Effective 4MP Interpolated???

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Phöènix, Dec 14, 2003.

  1. Phöènix

    Phöènix Guest

    Is this just a gimmick?

    If you understand what the interpolated pixel feature does can you explain
    it? maybe with reference to the following questions.

    Is there any real use for this feature on a digital camera? Will it improve
    prints? If so can software on a computer do just as good a job?
     
    Phöènix, Dec 14, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Phöènix

    Phöènix Guest

    Phöènix wrote:
    > Is this just a gimmick?
    >
    > If you understand what the interpolated pixel feature does can you
    > explain it? maybe with reference to the following questions.
    >

    Found myself this page which explained a lot.

    http://www.americaswonderlands.com/image_resizing.htm


    > Is there any real use for this feature on a digital camera?


    So yes I guess but very limited.

    > Will it
    > improve prints?


    If printing large enough

    > If so can software on a computer do just as good a
    > job?


    Yes and better, more appropriate for use.

    Feels like bad form to reply to my own post, feel free to join in.
     
    Phöènix, Dec 14, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Phöènix

    Mark Herring Guest

    On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:27:42 -0000, "Phöènix" <mindyouownbusiness>
    wrote:

    >Is this just a gimmick?


    YES---marketing hype. Fuji is the current worst offender
    >
    >If you understand what the interpolated pixel feature does can you explain
    >it? maybe with reference to the following questions.
    >
    >Is there any real use for this feature on a digital camera?

    NO
    >Will it improve
    >prints?

    maybe--see below
    >If so can software on a computer do just as good a job?


    Up-sampling (interpolation)--in the camera or the computer---is uesful
    to removed the jaggies and maybe to smooth out some noise and other
    artifacts. It can never add to the inherent resoltuion of the
    image---even if you are using Fuji super CCD diagonal pixels.

    More control if you just take basic pix at full camera resolution and
    then do the processing in the computer.

    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
     
    Mark Herring, Dec 14, 2003
    #3
  4. Phöènix

    Zol. Guest

    "Phöènix" <mindyouownbusiness> wrote in message
    news:3fdc6550$0$13355$...
    > Phöènix wrote:
    > > Is this just a gimmick?
    > >
    > > If you understand what the interpolated pixel feature does can you
    > > explain it? maybe with reference to the following questions.
    > >

    > Found myself this page which explained a lot.
    >
    > http://www.americaswonderlands.com/image_resizing.htm
    >
    >
    > > Is there any real use for this feature on a digital camera?

    >
    > So yes I guess but very limited.
    >
    > > Will it
    > > improve prints?

    >
    > If printing large enough
    >
    > > If so can software on a computer do just as good a
    > > job?

    >
    > Yes and better, more appropriate for use.
    >
    > Feels like bad form to reply to my own post, feel free to join in.
    >
    >


    Everybody talks to themselves sometimes :)

    You may want to check out Genuine Frcatals from http://www.lizardtech.com/solutions/gf/ - it
    can produce larger printable versions of your images without tremendous loss of quality - of
    course you will need Photoshop or Photoshop Elements to use the plug in and get the
    bennifits - they also have a starter edition which appears good value ... Zol.
     
    Zol., Dec 14, 2003
    #4
  5. Mark Herring <> writes:

    >Up-sampling (interpolation)--in the camera or the computer---is uesful
    >to removed the jaggies and maybe to smooth out some noise and other
    >artifacts. It can never add to the inherent resoltuion of the
    >image---even if you are using Fuji super CCD diagonal pixels.


    In the case of the Fuji cameras, the higher output resolution is
    necessary to *retain* the resolution captured by the camera. A 3 MP
    Fuji camera writing a 3 MP output image provides less total information
    than other 3 MP cameras. A 3 MP Fuji camera writing a 6 MP image
    provides the same total information as other 3 MP cameras, and more
    horizontal/vertical resolution.

    Whether the increase in horizontal/vertical resolution is useful is a
    subject for debate, but the interpolation used in the camera is
    *necessary* to retain that information while rotating the sampling grid.
    It is not empty magnification like "digital zoom" on other cameras.

    Dave
     
    Dave Martindale, Dec 16, 2003
    #5
  6. Dave Martindale <> observed
    >Mark Herring <> writes:
    >
    >>Up-sampling (interpolation)--in the camera or the computer---is uesful
    >>to removed the jaggies and maybe to smooth out some noise and other
    >>artifacts. It can never add to the inherent resoltuion of the
    >>image---even if you are using Fuji super CCD diagonal pixels.

    >
    >In the case of the Fuji cameras, the higher output resolution is
    >necessary to *retain* the resolution captured by the camera. A 3 MP
    >Fuji camera writing a 3 MP output image provides less total information
    >than other 3 MP cameras. A 3 MP Fuji camera writing a 6 MP image
    >provides the same total information as other 3 MP cameras, and more
    >horizontal/vertical resolution.
    >
    >Whether the increase in horizontal/vertical resolution is useful is a
    >subject for debate, but the interpolation used in the camera is
    >*necessary* to retain that information while rotating the sampling grid.
    >It is not empty magnification like "digital zoom" on other cameras.


    Very well put, Dave!

    Mike
    [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
    --
    Michael J Davis
    <><
    Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused
    the meaning of "discussion" with "digression".
    <><
     
    Michael J Davis, Dec 19, 2003
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mark Grady
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    896
  2. notreallyme
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    1,000
  3. Kimball K Kinnison

    Effective Pixels?

    Kimball K Kinnison, Apr 23, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    52
    Views:
    3,768
  4. Georgette Preddy
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    555
    Ray Fischer
    Jun 13, 2004
  5. Gregory L. Hansen

    (Effective) pixels?

    Gregory L. Hansen, Dec 13, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    1,255
    cjcampbell
    Dec 16, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page