help with a bad digital camera.

[Payne]

Right now the digital camera I am using is a Kodak Easyshare C613. The images are not very sharp, and I believe that this is because the highest quality is 6.1 megapixels. I was wondering if anybody knew if there is a way I can decrease the megapixel size so that I could get crisper images and more contrast in my digital photos. Thanks!

 

[grafxman]

Right now the digital camera I am using is a Kodak Easyshare C613. The images are not very sharp, and I believe that this is because the highest quality is 6.1 megapixels. I was wondering if anybody knew if there is a way I can decrease the megapixel size so that I could get crisper images and more contrast in my digital photos. Thanks![/QUOTE

I'm not familiar with your camera, however speaking in general terms, lack of sharpness and poor contrast is frequently caused by a poor quality lens. This is not always the case. If the camera is very slightly moved or jiggled when the shutter is pressed, this will also cause a lack of sharpness.

The lack of contrast is easily solved in image editing software. The sharpness can also be improved to a certain extent. Software such as Corel's Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 Ultimate($55) can do an excellent job. Moving up to Corel's CorelDRAW Graphics Suite X4 ($260) is also an option. It includes the excellent PhotoPaint as well as CorelDraw, a vector based drawing application plus a lot of other stuff. Then there's various offerings from Adobe that range up to Photoshop ($642).

BTW, there have been many excellent images taken with cameras that have 6 megapixels. You fundamental problem is likely a poor quality lens. However, much of what you describe can be corrected with software. Hope this helps. Good luck.

 

[PatrickHMS]

Right now the digital camera I am using is a Kodak Easyshare C613. The images are not very sharp, and I believe that this is because the highest quality is 6.1 megapixels. I was wondering if anybody knew if there is a way I can decrease the megapixel size so that I could get crisper images and more contrast in my digital photos. Thanks!

It could be the quality of your camera, or it could be how you are shooting with it.

The # of mp's your camera produces has nothing at all to do with the issue you are referring to. I have a 2mp Fuji p & s that will take very nice 8 1/2 x 11's. I did not say professional quality shots, but plenty good to post on the internet, or to print out for display purposes. I do it all the time in my business because the camera is so easy to use and to download to my pc or laptop.

Someone who does know what they are doing can use a lower mp digital camera that will produce better results than someone else using a pro level body and glass if one does not know what they are doing.

95% + of what people consider to make one a great photographer comes from between ones ears (their eye for a good shot, their creativity, their ability to compose a shot, knowledge, experience), not the equipment they are using. All the camera equipment does is to convert what the photographer visualizes to a digital file he can work with.

A DSLR is simply a computer with a lens.

A good, talented photographer can do nice work, even with just a p & s.

Ever been to the gym, see the guy with a new equipment /gym bag, loaded with all new stuff, and he comes out of the dressing room wearing all new clothing, you know what I mean. But he doesn't have a clue what to do with it?

Recently I saw a guy with a new camera bag, NICE stuff, pro body, all lenses were 2.8 glass, and you know the little cords that adhere to your lens cap to keep the cap from getting lost? He was using those little cords to hang his thousand dollar lenses with from a belt he was wearing. I asked him about it, he said he could change lenses more quickly that way.

GEESH!!!!!!!

You can learn to shoot with whatever you have, then upgrade your equipment whever the time is right for you to do so.

It does NOT take a $1,000 camera body to take good photographs. In 40 years of shooting I have seen very nice shots taken with a simple Kodak Brownie box camera.

I have a D40 that I still like to shoot with, and can get very nice results with it. A pro photographer from just a few years ago would die for that much technology in a camera body, and many people "poo poo" the lowly D40.

Photography can offer you a lifetime worth of enjoyment and satisfaction
not often found in this life, and it can be reasonably expensive, but it does not have to break you to begin taking nice photos with whatever you have, once you learn how to use it properly.

Better, or more expensive equipment is nice to have, but it is not always the solution.

Use whatever gear you have, and have fun with it, isn't that the whole point?

And you do not have to spend a ton of $$ on PP software. Many people would do just fine with Picasa3 (free shareware from Google) for the first year or more they are into photography.

 

[Garbz]

Actually downsampling an image with an algorithm that includes some sharpening (such as Photoshop's Bicubic Sharper resampling option) will increase the apparent sharpness of the image, especially if the sensor resolution outperforms the lens as is often the case with point and shoot cameras.

You can do that in virtually any image editing program. A quick one that also does well at sorting your photos is Google Picasa, or for a very advanced but still free option download GIMP.

One thing to note though is that this is a lossy process. The apparent sharpness increases but you lose the ability to make quality prints, as printing needs far more resolution that on screen display. So in a nutshell you can reduce your image size and get an increase in perceived sharpness at the expense of image size, but I would never recommend saving the final image as your only copy.

 

[JamesMason]

It could be the quality of your camera, or it could be how you are shooting with it.

Indeed. Always, Always, always use a tripod if you want really sharp shots.

6.1 mp is fine, MP's tend to be used by camera manufacturers to sell cameras (albeit for certain purposes you need more, like printing really big for example). I think it was camera phone manufacturers that started it off, you wont believe how many times ive been approached when shooting with my little d80 and asked

"whao how many megapixels is that"

i respond

"erm bout 8 i think"

they then say something like

"wow my camera phone is like 10mp i cant believe my camera phone is better than a big camera like that"

I then have to sit them down and tell them what patrickHMS just said. It annoys me how there is this huge misconception about mps that the people selling the cameras spread.

 

[UUilliam]

Yeah I was in an Asda (walmart) and went to the camera counter and one of the guys were like "Oh god 13 MP!! I might buy that, Why do they even sell "that" (pointing to a small Fuji DSLR which was 6mp) and i just started ranting (to myself lol)"

 

[Rifleman1776]

6mp is plenty, don't blame lack of sharpness on that. I have had lousy luck with Kodak digi cams. I think mine went into the trash. But, it could just be you. Really, more info needed.

 

[skid2964]

I would venture to guess that there is nothing wrong with your camera at all. You may simply have it set in one of the automatic scene modes for night portraits or something like that. Where the shutter is too slow to get a good sharp photo while being hand held.

A 6mp point and shoot can make some outstanding photos if the images are exposed properly and correctly.

Make sure the camera is in "auto" and try some pics.