Please help!

[outlander]

Hello,

I need to do some marketing work for a class. What i need to do is take some pictures, edit them on computer, then print them out as advertisments, aswell as use them as digital advertisments. So they need to be extremly high quality.
So here is my situation. I have a Samsung Digimax S600 digital camera 6 megapixels.
Then i have a Minolta STsi Maxxum traditional camera.
I am wondering which would come out as better quality? WIth the traditional i plan to get them developed, and to put them on a disc, so im wondering how good quality are they when they develop them onto a disc? Which would be better? etc..

Thank,

 

[shingfan]

what type of picture will you be taking? i think this is important to know

also....when you say extremely high quality......what exactly do you mean by that.....because the meaning is different with different standard?.....how large are you going to print them?......what resolution are you aiming for?

with the traiditonal film.....it depends on where you get it developed as well....and what scanner they use to scan your negative....as well as the resolution they use.....many factors...assuming that the photos are nicely captured

 

[blackdoglab]

Well, 35mm has about 15 megapixels per frame, so I'd probably shoot film (a low iso would work best like around 100 or 200) then get the best ones scanned and put onto a disk.

 

[outlander]

The type of photographs i will be using is for a marketing project. They photos will be of people mostly...in poses. Locations will be inside a factory (low light most likly) and outside.
The quality im looking for is something good enough to edit on computer with photoshop, and then print out on high quality paper, no bigger than the standard 8.5x11. Aswell as being used online.
The whole point is i am supposed to create advertisments for a clothing company. As i dont know what kinda of editing i will be doing on the photos. The highest quality i can get would be the best

 

[shorty6049]

just be careful, I had some photos developed at walmart and put on to a disc, and they werent very good quality. BUT , they also were underwater camera photos , so that makes a difference because of the natural grainyness of the film . I PERSONALLY, (this is just my opinion) would go with digital fromt he start. If this is just for a class, it might be easier, and faster to just go digital. UNLESS you need to blow it up huge or something. 8X10 should be fine though, but its going to cost you less in the long run to just go digital and have them start on your computer and get instant results... but like i said, thats just my opinion, and i may not be worth much...

 

[outlander]

That's the problem however. Im still not exactly sure what i will be doing for this project. It is worth alot in my final term. I may get them blown up to poster size. So that is why i would rather have them as high quality as i coul get. For the "just in case" factor. Cost really means nothing to me...$100 here and there means little to be top of the class.

 

[JonR]

Well, 35mm has about 15 megapixels per frame, so I'd probably shoot film (a low iso would work best like around 100 or 200) then get the best ones scanned and put onto a disk.

It does, but only if it's scanned at that resolution. Walmart or wherever are likely to scan it only at the size it's printed (e.g 6"x4"). Send it off to a pro lab and get them to dev and scan, check with them before hand what sort of resolution they will be scanning it at and ask them what size prints you will be able to make from it.