- Messages
- 7,987
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Are we all happy now cos my head hurts
DPI - definition
Double Pint Intake
Time for a nice
DPI setting
- Thread starter tomtom
- Start date
DPI - definition
Double Pint Intake
Time for a nice
- Messages
- 6,627
- Name
- Tel
- Edit My Images
- No
Are we all happy now cos my head hurts
LOL mine too, very interesting thread though i have enjoyed reading it, but there was just one more thing
- Messages
- 3,508
- Edit My Images
- Yes
DPI - definition
Double Pint Intake
Time for a nice
Sounds good to me - TFI Friday. Knew i should have taken this week off :baby:
- Messages
- 9,005
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
I think TomTom might have quit the forums after starting this thread!!
I bet he doesn't realise what he started does he
COME BACK...it's ok..... I often start threads like this....usually about tripods!!
and 486 computers
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
and 486 computers
:bonk:
- Messages
- 3,508
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No I dont think we meant that! Mine sounded a bit full-on as well.
We just meant that it got very deep and involved and tomtom only asked a little question!!
Yep - my thoughts too. Nothing wrong with a good discussion and we got there in the end
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Phew, just me being paranoid :embarrassed:
Well,, actually........WE were having an in-depth discussion.....and YOU were going WELL over the top, Grendel!!!!
:nono:
- Messages
- 3,508
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well,, actually........WE were having an in-depth discussion.....and YOU were going WELL over the top, Grendel!!!!
Janice - mean lady!
Whats this about 486?
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Grrrr well jokingly Steep said "I have a 486DX2 knocking about somewhere if thats any use to you" so I thought...funny isnt that a computer? So I sent him a PM to ask if a 486 dx2 wasnt a computer......only I sent the message to grendel instead and he didnt know what the hell I was talking about!!
He wouldnt be the first!! :shrug:
He wouldnt be the first!! :shrug:
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But, being a gentleman I still replied as if I DID know what you were talking about
It had nothing to do with being a gentleman.....you just wanted to sound clever!
- Messages
- 3,508
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But, being a gentleman I still replied as if I DID know what you were talking about
the Gentlemanly thing to do.Janice - the number of work related email cock-ups i've made stopped being funny a long time ago:embarrassed: I'm amazed they still pay me.
Roll on pub time
- Messages
- 9,005
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
:bang: bugger, rumbled again!It had nothing to do with being a gentleman.....you just wanted to sound clever!
Here hereRoll on pub time
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 7,987
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 11,626
- Name
- Janice
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 3,508
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well he'd have meant Mo Slater then!!!
Hey - leave my little Moroccon chappy out of this. poor chap needed 10 mins in the shade at 8 in the morning.
Actually, after this week, i know how he feels
- Messages
- 6,729
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Sorry to chime in very late on this coversation guys but it seems like there's an aweful lot of confusion and bad advice here in relation to resolution. All seem to be talking about dots instead of pixels and there is a difference.
The truth is pixels are what images are made of. So in relation to resolution the term should be ppi (pixels per inch).
The resolution coming out of your camera matters not a jot until you come to printing. The only thing that matters is the number of pixels (as has been noted above). Some people seemed to think this was wrong but it is quite correct.
My 20D produces 3504x2336 pixel images. Whether it comes of my camera at 1ppi or 1000ppi the image is still a 3504 x 2336 image.
Now when it comes to printing there are a couple of very easy ways to work out the unknown variable like print sizes or resolution.
1. You know the size of print you want (say 10x8) and you want to print it at 300ppi. You would need an image of 3000pixels x 2400 pixels in order to do this. If you have more pixels you can print at a higher resolution or as many do is crop the image to the required pixel count. Quality from printing at higher than 300ppi is unlikely to be seen by the human eye so 300ppi seems to be the preferred quality for small images. You can actually print at around 240ppi without any noticable drop in quality in a small image like this and as noted below you can go a lot lower for large prints.
2. You know the number of pixels you have and you want to print a large 18" x 12" print. At what res will this print out at without resampling the image.
Resolution= pixels/print size so:
3504/18 = 194.666 or
2336/12 = 194.66
Contrary to popular belief, this will provide a high quality image that will look fantastic from normal viewing distance. Because viewing distance will be further than that of a 6x4, the ppi can be a lot lower for larger images. (look from a distance at a billboard then look close up and you'll see what I mean). By printing these larger images at 300ppi all you do is increase the image size (greatly) and at the normal viewing distance you will not see a difference in the print! I print my 19x13s at just under 180ppi.
You can also add a third equation to work out how many pixels you need for an image. If you want a 12x8 print at 300ppi you need 12x300=3600 and 8x300=
2400. So you need an image of 3600x2400 (just outside the normal range of an 8Mp camera.
Now with resampling switched on you can increase the pixel content of your image but because you can print even a 6x4 at around 240ppi without any noticeable drop in quality all you need to do is accept a slightly lower ppi setting.
I try not to resample too much because all you are doing is either adding information that is not there in the first place (adding pixels or upsampling) or deleting pixel information (downsampling). The only time I do this is if I require a very large print that takes my resolution below around 150ppi.
There's so much misinformation on this subject around the web it's amazing how anyone gets to grips with this stuff.
Printers print in dots (dpi) and my R2400 can print at about 5670dpi. Now no matter the pixel resolution of my image I can print it at this high setting. So my 72ppi file that is 6x4 will still print at 6x4 but my printer will print it at 5760dpi but it'll still look crap because the 72ppi is not a high enough image resolution to get a good print. dpi is only for printing and scanning and should not be confused with images which are made up of pixels not dots.
Does this make sense? Hope I can help those who are struggling to understand this. Your use of digital images will improve when you understand the basic concept.
Here's a pretty good link
http://www.steves-digicams.com/techcorner/January_2005.html
Cheers
Jim
The truth is pixels are what images are made of. So in relation to resolution the term should be ppi (pixels per inch).
The resolution coming out of your camera matters not a jot until you come to printing. The only thing that matters is the number of pixels (as has been noted above). Some people seemed to think this was wrong but it is quite correct.
My 20D produces 3504x2336 pixel images. Whether it comes of my camera at 1ppi or 1000ppi the image is still a 3504 x 2336 image.
Now when it comes to printing there are a couple of very easy ways to work out the unknown variable like print sizes or resolution.
1. You know the size of print you want (say 10x8) and you want to print it at 300ppi. You would need an image of 3000pixels x 2400 pixels in order to do this. If you have more pixels you can print at a higher resolution or as many do is crop the image to the required pixel count. Quality from printing at higher than 300ppi is unlikely to be seen by the human eye so 300ppi seems to be the preferred quality for small images. You can actually print at around 240ppi without any noticable drop in quality in a small image like this and as noted below you can go a lot lower for large prints.
2. You know the number of pixels you have and you want to print a large 18" x 12" print. At what res will this print out at without resampling the image.
Resolution= pixels/print size so:
3504/18 = 194.666 or
2336/12 = 194.66
Contrary to popular belief, this will provide a high quality image that will look fantastic from normal viewing distance. Because viewing distance will be further than that of a 6x4, the ppi can be a lot lower for larger images. (look from a distance at a billboard then look close up and you'll see what I mean). By printing these larger images at 300ppi all you do is increase the image size (greatly) and at the normal viewing distance you will not see a difference in the print! I print my 19x13s at just under 180ppi.
You can also add a third equation to work out how many pixels you need for an image. If you want a 12x8 print at 300ppi you need 12x300=3600 and 8x300=
2400. So you need an image of 3600x2400 (just outside the normal range of an 8Mp camera.
Now with resampling switched on you can increase the pixel content of your image but because you can print even a 6x4 at around 240ppi without any noticeable drop in quality all you need to do is accept a slightly lower ppi setting.
I try not to resample too much because all you are doing is either adding information that is not there in the first place (adding pixels or upsampling) or deleting pixel information (downsampling). The only time I do this is if I require a very large print that takes my resolution below around 150ppi.
There's so much misinformation on this subject around the web it's amazing how anyone gets to grips with this stuff.
Printers print in dots (dpi) and my R2400 can print at about 5670dpi. Now no matter the pixel resolution of my image I can print it at this high setting. So my 72ppi file that is 6x4 will still print at 6x4 but my printer will print it at 5760dpi but it'll still look crap because the 72ppi is not a high enough image resolution to get a good print. dpi is only for printing and scanning and should not be confused with images which are made up of pixels not dots.
Does this make sense? Hope I can help those who are struggling to understand this. Your use of digital images will improve when you understand the basic concept.
Here's a pretty good link
http://www.steves-digicams.com/techcorner/January_2005.html
Cheers
Jim