300 dpi????

[jwbryson1]

Ya know I am really glad I became a new member of a forum to get some help and information. Maybe you all should ask before judging someone. Thanks for those who actually answered and helped me and screw the rest of you that were assholes! Im leaving as quickly as I joined!

Where are Mishele and Bitter when you need them?! They would LOVE this thread!

Bye bye, AmateurAllie....errrr.....my bad.

 

[jwbryson1]

I picked up a copy of Grey's Anatomy at the bookstore this past weekend. For practice, I'm doing frontal lobotomy's this Saturday if anybody's interested. Free of charge, of course.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I am doing them for free for practice. Thanks for asking! Geeze!

YOU called them CLIENTS. Businesses have clients. Businesses make money. Don't get all pissy and blame us, because YOU missrepresented your situation.


People suck. And it goes both ways.

 

[matthewo]

I picked up a copy of Grey's Anatomy at the bookstore this past weekend. For practice, I'm doing frontal lobotomy's this Saturday if anybody's interested. Free of charge, of course.

Hahahaha. Good one

 

[jowensphoto]

She left way too quietly. Calm before the storm?

 

[KmH]

.... a potential future client.......

To be precise.

Seems someone is/was looking to the future, even if they have one hell of a long way to go.

 

[Austin Greene]

She left way too quietly. Calm before the storm?

I think thats lurking in the back of all of our minds right about now.

Oh well! You know how the saying goes...

"Another one bites the dust..."

 

[Ballistics]

Ya know I am really glad I became a new member of a forum to get some help and information. Maybe you all should ask before judging someone. Thanks for those who actually answered and helped me and screw the rest of you that were assholes! Im leaving as quickly as I joined!

YOU called them CLIENTS. Businesses have clients. Businesses make money. Don't get all pissy and blame us, because YOU missrepresented your situation.


People suck. And it goes both ways.

What this guy said.

You omit information, volunteer misleading information, but everyone else is wrong for "assuming". Does that make sense to you? Calling someone a client that you are merely doing a favor for is like me calling my son my patient when I take his temperature.

 

[Kolander]

...Thanks for those who actually answered and helped me and screw the rest of you that were assholes! Im leaving as quickly as I joined!

Love this moments of the photography trade.

 

[nickzou]

Okay, okay, okay. Here's my question. Kinda related to this topic. So on one side it seems consistent that everyone (people on this forum, professional print makers) that 300dpi is the standard for high quality printing. But at the SAME time, I keep hearing "yeah you can make high quality large prints with a D1x" (a 5 megapixel camera)... what? So at once everything has to be printed at 300dpi but at the same time megapixels don't matter. Can someone explain this to me?

 

[Austin Greene]

Okay, okay, okay. Here's my question. Kinda related to this topic. So on one side it seems consistent that everyone (people on this forum, professional print makers) that 300dpi is the standard for high quality printing. But at the SAME time, I keep hearing "yeah you can make high quality large prints with a D1x" (a 5 megapixel camera)... what? So at once everything has to be printed at 300dpi but at the same time megapixels don't matter. Can someone explain this to me?

How dare you try to take this thread in a relevant direction!

 

[KmH]

More and more it seems one of the main functions of Internet forums is to perpetuate urban legends.

How big is a 'large print'?

300 dpi is not a standard for high quality printing. 300 PPI is a resolution guideline. Calling pixels - dots, is like calling inches - feet. Pixels and dots are just not the same.

Image content and technical quality have tons to do with what resolution (PPI) a image can be printed at and still be a high quality print.

Doing some 5th grade math we can see that at some large enough print size, 300 PPI is unattainable without resorting to up-resing a photo and making up pixels out of thin air.

As an example the Nikon D7000 delivers photos that are 4928 pixels on the long side of the image frame and 3264 pixels on the short side of the image frame.

The long side of the largest print that could be made from a D7000 at 300 PPI without up-res then is 4928 pixels divided by 300 PPI (pixels-per-inch) = 16.43 inches.
If you want a non up-resed print that is 30 inches on the long side, then 4928 pixels divided by 30 inches = 164 PPI

But 164 PPI is ok, because the 30 inch long sided print will be viewed from about twice as far away as the 16.43 inch photo is.

Regarding the Nikon D1X - Nikon D1x Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

resolution CCD (rectangular pixels)The D1X's pixel grid layout is rectangular rather than square (though still uses the Bayer GRGB colour filter array), in camera processing turns the 4028 x 1324 raw pixels (5.33 megapixel) into a 3008 x 1960 pixel image (5.9 megapixel). While it's clear that some interpolation is being carried out in the vertical direction (to get from 1324 rows to 1960 rows) there is also compression in the horizontal direction (reducing from 4028 to 3008 columns), this compression is used to add detail to the vertical data. Nikon argue that because the input and output resolution are almost identical no image degradation will be visible. Something we'll be able to test later in this review...

D1X "sees" an image with higher horizontal resolution, 4028 x 1324 (approx. 6:2)	D1X produces an image which is horizontally narrower and vertically taller, 3008 x 1960 (approx. 3:2)

The reasoning behind using a layout is that Nikon have managed to double resolution while maintaining a usable frame rate, by keeping the "readout queue" the same (1324 rows) they have managed to maintain relatively high frame rates (3 fps) while doubling the overall resolution of the camera.

 

[MWC2]

Okay, okay, okay. Here's my question. Kinda related to this topic. So on one side it seems consistent that everyone (people on this forum, professional print makers) that 300dpi is the standard for high quality printing. But at the SAME time, I keep hearing "yeah you can make high quality large prints with a D1x" (a 5 megapixel camera)... what? So at once everything has to be printed at 300dpi but at the same time megapixels don't matter. Can someone explain this to me?

I'm just a newb, so someone will correct me if I'm wrong but megapixels are NOT created equal. The quailty of your megapixel depends greatly on the size of your camera sensor. This is why my 40D (10.1 mp) can and does create a higher quality print than a 14 mp p&S camera.

* If I'm wrong someone please correct me.

 

[KmH]

Yep, all pixels are NOT created equal.

Not all pixels are the same size.

Canon's APS-C, or crop, image sensors are slightly smaller than Nikon's APS-C image sensors. So at 10 MP each pixel on the Canon camera will be slightly smaller than a pixel on a 10 MP Nikon camera.

If you pack 8 more MP on an APS-C sensor (18 MP) then the pixels are even smaller because the size of the sensor didn't change much, if any.

Also at issue is what kind of pixel - a CCD pixel or a CMOS pixel.

 

[Stradawhovious]

My Lord how I've missed this forum.

The Drama, The political soapboxes, the premature professionals with hurt feelers..........

[takes deep breath]

It's good to be back.