Nikon D70 Question

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dave Mann, May 29, 2006.

  1. Dave Mann

    Dave Mann Guest

    I have a D70 for almost a year. I shoot in Fine, Large, JPEG mode. When I
    open the pictures in Photoshop the rulers would display something like 30x22
    (just a guess). This all of a sudden stopped, the pictures are now 10x7.5.
    I know I am not crazy, I have a Olympus SP-350 (8MP) and the images are
    44x30. What setting do I need to change? I tested this on 3 different CF
    cards so I am sure it is a camera setting. Please help.....thanks

    My email address is dhb1(remove-this)@optonline.net
     
    Dave Mann, May 29, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dave Mann

    Wayne Guest

    In article <9zseg.671$>, says...
    >
    >
    >I have a D70 for almost a year. I shoot in Fine, Large, JPEG mode. When I
    >open the pictures in Photoshop the rulers would display something like 30x22
    >(just a guess). This all of a sudden stopped, the pictures are now 10x7.5.
    >I know I am not crazy, I have a Olympus SP-350 (8MP) and the images are
    >44x30. What setting do I need to change? I tested this on 3 different CF
    >cards so I am sure it is a camera setting. Please help.....thanks



    Dave, the absolute first step to understanding the first thing about digital
    images is to know that digital images are dimensioned in pixels. The numbers
    like 30x22 inches and 44x30 inches have zero meaning or significance. The
    images are instead dimensioned in pixels. Only in pixels.

    The D70 is a 6 megapixel camera, natively 3008x2000 pixels unless you specify
    a smaller size. 3008x2000 = 6 million pixels, and the image dimension is
    3008 pixels by 2000 pixels.

    The Olympus SP-350 is a 8 megapixel camera, natively 3264x2448 pixels unless
    you specify a smaller size. 3264x2448 = 8 million pixels, and the image
    dimension is 3264x2448 pixels.

    All there is is pixels.

    The inches come only from spacing those pixels on paper, for example maybe
    printed at 300 pixels per inch. For example, 3008 pixels spaced 300 pixels
    per inch will cover 3008/300 = 10 inches of paper. At some other ppi value,
    the same pixels will cover a different number of inches on paper, but it is
    still the same image size in pixels.

    The default ppi value is arbitrary and meaningless until you assign it
    intelligently, since the camera has absolutely no notion what size you will
    want to print it on paper. Many cameras dont assign any ppi value, and then
    Photoshop will assign 72 ppi if the value is missing, and that is where you
    get the huge sizes like 44 inches. This is totally meaningless, because 1)
    you would never print at 72 ppi (quality too poor), and 2) you would never
    print 44 inches (printer not big enough). It only means "this needs your
    attention".

    My D70 assigns 300 dpi as a first guess (about your unknown printed size),
    which is the 10x7.5 inches (from 3008x2000 pixels, spaced 300 pixels per
    inch). If you discard the JPG EXIF tags, you will loose that value, and
    Photoshop will assume 72 ppi again. BUT the number is meaningless because
    it all depends on the size you choose to print it. Regardless, the image is
    still dimensioned 3008x2000 pixels, and the 10x7.5 inches is simply the size
    estimate of those pixel dimensions if you chose to print it at 300 ppi. The
    10x7.5 inches is NOT image size.... it is print size if you print it at 300
    ppi. The image size remains 3008x2000 pixels.

    Instead of 300 ppi and 10x7.5 inches, you could instead print it 250 ppi to
    get 8x12 inches on paper, or 200 ppi to get 15x10 inches on paper. In all
    these cases, it is exactly still the same 3008x2000 pixel image. Images are
    dimensioned in pixels. There is no way to ignore this detail.
     
    Wayne, May 29, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dave Mann

    Dave Mann Guest

    Great answer, things are much clearer now. I just wonder why this is
    happening all of a sudden. I had the camera serviced a few months ago with
    Nikon, I wonder if they updated the firmware and this made the change. Is
    there a way to disregard the EXIF tags? Thanks for your very detailed
    answer it was very helpful!!!


    "Wayne" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:eueg.9963$U_2.2660@trnddc05...
    > In article <9zseg.671$>, says...
    > >
    > >
    > >I have a D70 for almost a year. I shoot in Fine, Large, JPEG mode. When

    I
    > >open the pictures in Photoshop the rulers would display something like

    30x22
    > >(just a guess). This all of a sudden stopped, the pictures are now

    10x7.5.
    > >I know I am not crazy, I have a Olympus SP-350 (8MP) and the images are
    > >44x30. What setting do I need to change? I tested this on 3 different CF
    > >cards so I am sure it is a camera setting. Please help.....thanks

    >
    >
    > Dave, the absolute first step to understanding the first thing about

    digital
    > images is to know that digital images are dimensioned in pixels. The

    numbers
    > like 30x22 inches and 44x30 inches have zero meaning or significance. The
    > images are instead dimensioned in pixels. Only in pixels.
    >
    > The D70 is a 6 megapixel camera, natively 3008x2000 pixels unless you

    specify
    > a smaller size. 3008x2000 = 6 million pixels, and the image dimension is
    > 3008 pixels by 2000 pixels.
    >
    > The Olympus SP-350 is a 8 megapixel camera, natively 3264x2448 pixels

    unless
    > you specify a smaller size. 3264x2448 = 8 million pixels, and the image
    > dimension is 3264x2448 pixels.
    >
    > All there is is pixels.
    >
    > The inches come only from spacing those pixels on paper, for example maybe
    > printed at 300 pixels per inch. For example, 3008 pixels spaced 300

    pixels
    > per inch will cover 3008/300 = 10 inches of paper. At some other ppi

    value,
    > the same pixels will cover a different number of inches on paper, but it

    is
    > still the same image size in pixels.
    >
    > The default ppi value is arbitrary and meaningless until you assign it
    > intelligently, since the camera has absolutely no notion what size you

    will
    > want to print it on paper. Many cameras dont assign any ppi value, and

    then
    > Photoshop will assign 72 ppi if the value is missing, and that is where

    you
    > get the huge sizes like 44 inches. This is totally meaningless, because

    1)
    > you would never print at 72 ppi (quality too poor), and 2) you would never
    > print 44 inches (printer not big enough). It only means "this needs your
    > attention".
    >
    > My D70 assigns 300 dpi as a first guess (about your unknown printed size),
    > which is the 10x7.5 inches (from 3008x2000 pixels, spaced 300 pixels per
    > inch). If you discard the JPG EXIF tags, you will loose that value, and
    > Photoshop will assume 72 ppi again. BUT the number is meaningless

    because
    > it all depends on the size you choose to print it. Regardless, the image

    is
    > still dimensioned 3008x2000 pixels, and the 10x7.5 inches is simply the

    size
    > estimate of those pixel dimensions if you chose to print it at 300 ppi.

    The
    > 10x7.5 inches is NOT image size.... it is print size if you print it at

    300
    > ppi. The image size remains 3008x2000 pixels.
    >
    > Instead of 300 ppi and 10x7.5 inches, you could instead print it 250 ppi

    to
    > get 8x12 inches on paper, or 200 ppi to get 15x10 inches on paper. In all
    > these cases, it is exactly still the same 3008x2000 pixel image. Images

    are
    > dimensioned in pixels. There is no way to ignore this detail.
    >
     
    Dave Mann, May 29, 2006
    #3
  4. On Mon, 29 May 2006 06:36:07 -0400, in rec.photo.digital "Dave Mann"
    <> wrote:

    >Great answer, things are much clearer now. I just wonder why this is
    >happening all of a sudden. I had the camera serviced a few months ago with
    >Nikon, I wonder if they updated the firmware and this made the change.


    The original 1.02 FW in my D70 shows 300 dpi in the exif for the limited
    jpg shots I took early on in 2004, which both PSE3.0 and PSP8.0 read and
    use.

    >Is
    >there a way to disregard the EXIF tags?


    Why would you want to do this? What's the big deal?
    --
    Ed Ruf ()
     
    Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!), May 29, 2006
    #4
  5. Dave Mann

    Wayne Guest

    In article <y8Aeg.895$>, says...
    >
    >
    >Great answer, things are much clearer now. I just wonder why this is
    >happening all of a sudden. I had the camera serviced a few months ago with
    >Nikon, I wonder if they updated the firmware and this made the change. Is
    >there a way to disregard the EXIF tags? Thanks for your very detailed
    >answer it was very helpful!!!



    The firmware upgrade seems a good bet to explain a difference, but I dont
    know any details of it. Actually, I have a D70S so I have only seen it after
    the effect of the firmware upgrade. My D70S came with the new firmware, and
    does store 300 ppi in the JPG EXIF tags. From your story description, then
    it seems a good bet that the original D70 firmware must have been different.

    It is common for many digital cameras to NOT store any ppi value in the image
    file... to leave it blank. Which is extremely reasonable, because the
    camera simply has no clue what size you may want to print the image on paper,
    so it has no idea what number to put there. You will do it later when you
    decide what size it should print.

    If there was no ppi value stored in the image file, then 3008x2000 pixels at
    72 ppi (Photoshop makes up 72 ppi to show you when no other value is present)
    would print over 41x27 inches (as is). For the Olympus 3264x2448 pixel
    image, 72 ppi would print 45x34 inches. But these numbers have no meaning,
    as you would/could never print at either 72 ppi or at 45 inches. You would
    correct the details when you are ready to print it. Or, you would specify to
    the photo lab to print it at say 6x4 inches, and they will tend to the
    details.

    The new 300 ppi value has no meaning either (in this case assigned by the
    camera), because the camera does not know what size you will want to print
    it. It is only done today for the purpose to hide the ridiculous 42x28 inch
    numbers, which were ludicrous (but the camera wasnt doing that, Photoshop
    just doesnt know how to say "no ppi number assigned yet", and so makes up the
    dummy 72 dpi number to fill a blank space). The 300 ppi number has merit
    only because 10x7.5 inches is at least a believable possibility. :)

    However, after you examined and considered it, and decided that you wanted to
    print 10x7.5 inches, then the 300 ppi has very significant meaning to
    implement that choice. But the main key to understanding is to realize that
    digital images are dimensioned in pixels. Paper prints are dimensioned in
    inches.

    --
    Wayne
    http://www.scantips.com "A few scanning tips"
     
    Wayne, May 29, 2006
    #5
  6. Dave Mann

    Wayne Guest

    In article <y8Aeg.895$>, says...

    >Is there a way to disregard the EXIF tags?


    I dont know what might have happened, but I failed to say that one
    possibility is that if you were to save the image again using the Photoshop
    "Save for web" menu, that menu will discard all JPG EXIF tags, including ppi
    value. Because web browsers have no use for EXIF tags or ppi numbers, so
    then this option saves a few bytes for access speed. This means that
    Photoshop will make up 72 ppi next time you open it.

    If you save the image with the Photoshop "Save" menu and select JPG, then it
    will retain the EXIF tags and the existing ppi number, and Photoshop should
    see that same original number next time.

    --
    Wayne
    http://www.scantips.com "A few scanning tips"
     
    Wayne, May 29, 2006
    #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. Fred B.

    Nikon SB26 flash and Nikon D70

    Fred B., Sep 2, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    667
  2. J. Cod
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    474
    J. Cod
    Sep 29, 2004
  3. Xtx99
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    612
    Dave L
    Jan 13, 2005
  4. Woody

    Use of old Nikon zoom lenses with Nikon D70

    Woody, Jan 17, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    522
  5. Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,008
    Joseph Miller
    Jun 7, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page