|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Mr.Bolshoyhuy
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:49 am Post subject: reducing MP's |
 |
|
For the same number of pics taken with a 6mp camera set to fine all
the files are 200mb(3.6mb each) vs 4mp all files are 50mb(700kb
each). I could not tell the difference in quality of the pics.
Thus, to preserve the highest quality, do I reduce mp's or increase
compression by using normal or economy settings?
I mostly use ISO100. I am not making prints.
With compacts inching towards 10mp, when does it become too much for
small sensors?
Some people might say (even when 4mp was the norm) if not making
prints, reduce MPs by half.
Is it true that you get better quality pics with a 8mp camera reduced
to 4mp than if using a 4mp camera? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:50 am Post subject: Re: reducing MP's |
|
|
On 25 Apr 2007 17:49:08 -0700, in rec.photo.digital "Mr.Bolshoyhuy"
<bolshoyhuy@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
For the same number of pics taken with a 6mp camera set to fine all
the files are 200mb(3.6mb each) vs 4mp all files are 50mb(700kb
each). I could not tell the difference in quality of the pics.
Thus, to preserve the highest quality, do I reduce mp's or increase
compression by using normal or economy settings?
I mostly use ISO100. I am not making prints.
|
So what is your criteria? Viewing the full image on a computer screen (at
what resolution) or zooming in to what level?
--
Ed Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardGRuf.com)
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 2:40 pm Post subject: Re: reducing MP's |
|
|
On Apr 25, 7:49 pm, "Mr.Bolshoyhuy" <bolshoy...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | For the same number of pics taken with a 6mp camera set to fine all
the files are 200mb(3.6mb each) vs 4mp all files are 50mb(700kb
each). I could not tell the difference in quality of the pics.
Thus, to preserve the highest quality, do I reduce mp's or increase
compression by using normal or economy settings?
I mostly use ISO100. I am not making prints.
With compacts inching towards 10mp, when does it become too much for
small sensors?
Some people might say (even when 4mp was the norm) if not making
prints, reduce MPs by half.
Is it true that you get better quality pics with a 8mp camera reduced
to 4mp than if using a 4mp camera?
|
It depends a lot on the specific subject and type of scene, but
generally using a moderate amount of jpeg compression is preferable to
downsampling. Moderate jpeg will reduce the file size (though not the
number of pixels) by a much greater amount than typical downsizing.
jpeg compression does NOT alter the resolution on most scenes. What
you do lose is a small amount of color accuracy and shading. With
greater amounts of compression, these artifacts will become
noticable. But the least compression setting (frequently called HQ in
cameras) will usually be fine. This is much better for most scenes
than downsampling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Watched Topics
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Profile
Log in
Memberlist
Usergroups