pixel resolution for prints

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Zeno, Jul 21, 2003.

  1. Zeno

    Zeno Guest

    Just wondering what would be considered the megapixel range for variously
    sized photo quality prints.

    I'm behind the times with my Olympus 2000Z which sports only 2.1 megapixels,
    but damn it's still a good camera. You can check out what it can do at:

    http://home.att.net/~martin.john.d/west.htm

    John
    Zeno, Jul 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Zeno" <> wrote in message
    news:CjUSa.65596$...
    > Just wondering what would be considered the megapixel range for variously
    > sized photo quality prints.
    >
    > I'm behind the times with my Olympus 2000Z which sports only 2.1

    megapixels,
    > but damn it's still a good camera. You can check out what it can do at:
    >
    > http://home.att.net/~martin.john.d/west.htm
    >
    > John


    It depends on what you consider acceptable, and the nature of the image. If
    the subject of the photo looks good in a "soft" print. it ill be OK to most
    people at 150 dpi. but 200 to 300 dpi is what is usually recommended as the
    minimu resolution for a print. On that basis, a 2.1 Mp camera can be used
    for prints up to 4X6.
    Marvin Margoshes, Jul 21, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Zeno

    jriegle Guest

    200-300 dots per inch (dpi) is the typical recommended resolution, but 200
    dpi on 4x6 prints (approx. 1.3mp) looks soft. 260 dpi (2 mp) is much better,
    but I'm more picky and recommend 300 dpi. A 3mp camera gets you beyond this
    with some room to crop. You can get good 5x7s and fair 8x10s from a 3mp
    camera, therefore, I would recommend 3mp as a minimum. 3mp digicams are not
    too costly now days.

    John


    "Zeno" <> wrote in message
    news:CjUSa.65596$...
    > Just wondering what would be considered the megapixel range for variously
    > sized photo quality prints.
    >
    > I'm behind the times with my Olympus 2000Z which sports only 2.1

    megapixels,
    > but damn it's still a good camera. You can check out what it can do at:
    >
    > http://home.att.net/~martin.john.d/west.htm
    >
    > John
    >
    >
    jriegle, Jul 22, 2003
    #3
  4. Zeno

    Silvio Dante Guest

    Silvio Dante, Jul 22, 2003
    #4
  5. Zeno

    Silvio Dante Guest

    Lionel <> staggered into the Bada Bing and slurred:

    >>Doesn't the human eye max out at around 350 dots per inch anyway?

    >
    >Depends on the eye. My eyesight is extremely good (in resolution, at
    >least - I'm very mildly red/green colour blind), & I have no trouble
    >seeing the difference between 600 & 1200 DPI monochrome laser prints,
    >for example.


    I read that somewhere. That goes to show you shouldn't believe what you
    read. This other article http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/printer-ppi/
    says 1,000 PPI is a more realistic limit.


    "She's so fat, her blood type is Ragu."
    Silvio Dante, Jul 23, 2003
    #5
  6. Zeno

    Rafe B. Guest

    On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:25:13 -0700, Silvio Dante
    <> wrote:

    >Lionel <> staggered into the Bada Bing and slurred:
    >
    >>>Doesn't the human eye max out at around 350 dots per inch anyway?

    >>
    >>Depends on the eye. My eyesight is extremely good (in resolution, at
    >>least - I'm very mildly red/green colour blind), & I have no trouble
    >>seeing the difference between 600 & 1200 DPI monochrome laser prints,
    >>for example.

    >
    >I read that somewhere. That goes to show you shouldn't believe what you
    >read. This other article http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/printer-ppi/
    >says 1,000 PPI is a more realistic limit.




    Monochrome laser printers use halftone screens.

    Color inkjet prints use error diffusion to lay down dots.

    When you're talking 600 vs. 1200 dpi in the above, you're
    talking about the printer's ability to place dots. And yes,
    it is normal in this case to see a difference.

    You have similar choices in inkjet printers -- eg., whether
    to print at 720 dpi or 1440 dpi horizontal.

    However, these numbers (600, 1200, 720, 1440) have
    no relation to the resolution of the image being printed.

    On today's best photo-quality inkjets, I defy anyone
    to demonstrate conclusively that image resolutions
    above, say, 360 dpi, result in a visible improvement
    in image quality.

    Lightjet printers -- which produce true contone output --
    have a native resolution of 305 dpi.


    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
    Rafe B., Jul 23, 2003
    #6
  7. Zeno

    Don Stauffer Guest

    Eye resolution is very task dependent. Literally, resolution tests
    originally were to be able to tell if two closely adjacent white dots
    (stars) appeared as one or as two.

    Seperating closely spaced lines has a different value than closely
    spaced dots. Black detail on white background has a different value
    than white detail on black background. So called vernier acuity is VERY
    high. There are a number of values the army uses for specific tasks in
    detecting, recognizing, and identifying tanks, for instance.

    Upshot is, there is a wide range of latitude about how much detail or
    resolution the human eye has. Be careful using figure for one type of
    task and applying it to another.

    Silvio Dante wrote:
    >
    > Lionel <> staggered into the Bada Bing and slurred:
    >
    > >>Doesn't the human eye max out at around 350 dots per inch anyway?

    > >
    > >Depends on the eye. My eyesight is extremely good (in resolution, at
    > >least - I'm very mildly red/green colour blind), & I have no trouble
    > >seeing the difference between 600 & 1200 DPI monochrome laser prints,
    > >for example.

    >
    > I read that somewhere. That goes to show you shouldn't believe what you
    > read. This other article http://clarkvision.com/imagedetail/printer-ppi/
    > says 1,000 PPI is a more realistic limit.
    >
    > "She's so fat, her blood type is Ragu."


    --
    Don Stauffer in Minnesota

    webpage- http://www.usfamily.net/web/stauffer
    Don Stauffer, Jul 23, 2003
    #7
  8. Zeno

    Savidge4 Guest

    >On today's best photo-quality inkjets, I defy anyone
    >to demonstrate conclusively that image resolutions
    >above, say, 360 dpi, result in a visible improvement
    >in image quality


    On solid media IE photo paper matte and glossy and simple bond paper I will
    100% agree with you. However, you print on a backlit film and there is an
    obvious difference between say 300 600 and 1200 DPI prints. at 300 dpi with
    backlit film black is still on the opaque side and the more DPI used in
    printing the more "Solid" or less opaque it becomes. at 2400 DPI you can
    actually almost obtain a non opaque solid. (meaning no light comes through)

    Now understanding that more DPI obviously lays down more ink it would stand to
    reason to suggest that color intensity in ALL prints will increase with the
    increase in DPI. but again with solid media the question is asked is it
    noticable.
    Savidge4, Jul 24, 2003
    #8
  9. Zeno

    AB Guest

    "Zeno" <> wrote in message news:<CjUSa.65596$>...
    > Just wondering what would be considered the megapixel range for variously
    > sized photo quality prints.
    >
    > I'm behind the times with my Olympus 2000Z which sports only 2.1 megapixels,
    > but damn it's still a good camera. You can check out what it can do at:
    >
    > http://home.att.net/~martin.john.d/west.htm
    >
    > John



    John
    The camera is not the only criteria for picture size. The printer
    and software are also just as important. Are you printing on a 300dpi
    HP or a 1440dpi Epson? Check out this site, they have some samples of
    prints at different MP printed on an EPSON 9600 at 1440dpi.


    http://www.showtelinc.com/aphotomain.htm


    Alice
    AB, Jul 24, 2003
    #9
    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. Abrasha

    Hot pixel vs. stuck pixel

    Abrasha, Aug 2, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    8,440
    Steven Buglass
    Sep 2, 2003
  2. Tom Thackrey

    Re: Pixel size of individual Pixel

    Tom Thackrey, Sep 14, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    788
  3. Robert E. Williams

    Re: Pixel size of individual Pixel

    Robert E. Williams, Sep 14, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    522
    Don Stauffer
    Sep 16, 2003
  4. Peter H

    Fuji S3000 - 3.2 m/pixel or 6 m/pixel?

    Peter H, Nov 18, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    671
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    681
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page