I have a Canon sd800is. When set to maximum mega-pixels and on superfine quality, the photos a are 4000-5000 kb each. This makes it hard to upload and send (takes forever per photo). Does te max setting just give you a larger photo of the same quality if you set it on a lower setting, say 600x800 (medium low setting)?
Also, I have read or heard that the larger the file size, the more chances of getting compression noise in the photos if reduced to a smaller size printed photo? Help! Thank you!
2007-01-17 23:18:14 · 5 answers · asked by JasSays 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
I guess what I am asking in short is, on the superfine setting, besides actual size of the photo, will the quality be the same no matter which megapixel setting I am using...since the pixels simply determine the size of the print or what's on your screen?
2007-01-18 00:26:04 · update #1
I appreciate your lack of enthusiasim for big file sizes!
Try the 2048 x 1536 setup on your camera for good quality prints up to 8X10. The transfer times and file "handling" will go much faster. I would also recommend using Google"s Picasa image system for organizing your pictures. The email program has an automatic resizer to speed up the sending of pictures by email, as well as a bunch of other cool stuff. It is also free...
2007-01-18 06:17:59 · answer #1 · answered by john_e_29212 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There really is no set mega-pixel equivalent for non-digital photos, they are usually described in inches, like a 5 x 7 inch photograph. If you were to scan a photograph, it would depend on the dots per inch that you scanned it at, or if you were to take a digital photograph with a digital camera, with, say a 5 mega pixel digital camera, the resulting photo could be as large as 5 mega pixels, which means it has a lot of colors and a lot of detail, and take 5 million pixels or squares to store the color.
2016-03-14 07:31:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree, use the maximum size possible, and put up with the time taken to transfer them. It, actually, shouldn't taken that long. My camera is 6.1mp as against yours at 7.1, so not great deal of difference. I can upload a card of say 100 pics in about 10 mins - which isn't really that long - using a card reader and USB 2. Don't use that size, however, for 'sending' (by which, I assume you mean emailing) - reduce them in size and save the reduced copy as another picture.
600x800 is tiny, not medium low and I would never use that size.
2007-01-17 23:49:38 · answer #3 · answered by rdenig_male 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The others are right... always shoot the best... you never kinow when you'll say "boy, I'm glad I had it set to fine"...For family shot around the house just for emailing.... save the originals as .TIFFs and lower resolution copies as .JPG.
Tiff does not use compression and doesn't present a noise problem after being opened a few time,JPGs will detereiorate and lose info every time it it opened and closed.
I have a file on my desktop call"email" and I keep my reduced size jpgs in it. They are handy when I want to share them.
2007-01-18 03:14:52 · answer #4 · answered by beauxPatrick 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You asked a Q I've been wondering myself and some previous answers are excellent!
My suggestion :: Take several pix at different sizes and qualities.
Since the 'film' is free it's good to experiment ourselves;
this is what I'm going to do.
And thank you for asking.
.
2007-01-18 07:09:55 · answer #5 · answered by Freesumpin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you can only take a picture once, so pick the highest you can have and compress them later, compression noise from resizeing depends on the program used. i think its acceptable.
most compression noise comes from poor file format.
2007-01-17 23:25:52 · answer #6 · answered by Avskull 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋