- Messages
- 11,756
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
A nice Islay malt gets the same results with much less liquid, and more taste rewards. You really need to learn how to work more efficiently
I don't do miniature format alcohol!
Steve.
Post of the week. And I wholeheartedly concur.I don't do miniature format alcohol!
Steve.
LOL.
It's possible to create a A0 image from a ONE megapixel image, but it would look like crap. If you think a A0 print from a 6 mega pixel source is acceptable, then you've got a very different idea of quality than I have. Probably why you're too ashamed to show any work.
All I'm saying is it is impossible to crop into an image and not lose quality. All this rhetoric about whether it's noticeable or not is academic. It does lose quality, and it is a fact. I'm saying no more, or less. Never have
Big prints?
If you don't think it's that important to do everything within your power to maintain quality, why did you spend £3000 on a standard lens if you're then just going to crop into your images and begin the process of losing that MINUSCULE amount of quality you've gained by spending £2700 more than everyone else spends on a standard lens?
****ing hypocrite.. LOL
Yeah, and I said... it would have looked crap... you just clearly don't recognise what crap looks like.
I used to have a EOS 350D (8MP) and even at A3 it looked dodgy unless you were far enough away from it, and NO ONE looks at a A3 print from far enough away to hide it, no matter how much you convince yourself they do.
So the quality it loses you only know about because someone tells you it is cropped because you can't see it? Could you make more of a moot point?
Because it's pointless. Of course you can treat yourself to "nice equipment" if you want, it's your money, I just don't understand why you'd want to do that if you're only going to publish in formats where the advantage it provides is not perceivable.Why? Is there something wrong with treating yourself to nice equipment or is the top stuff only for pros?
Why? Is there something wrong with treating yourself to nice equipment or is the top stuff only for pros?
Because it's pointless. Of course you can treat yourself to "nice equipment" if you want, it's your money, I just don't understand why you'd want to do that if you're only going to publish in formats where the advantage it provides is not perceivable.
You have a point but the conversation was focused on resolution. Most of the genuine applications of high end tech (such as low light focus and great ISO capability) would produce marked improvements to only a small number of the kind of shots you see posted in this forum (and elsewhere).because there's more to top end gear than pixel resolution - e.g focusing, high iso capability etc
Why? Is there something wrong with treating yourself to nice equipment or is the top stuff only for pros?
If the top stuff was only for pros, it would be such a niche market that they wouldn't be able to afford it.
Steve.
Cropping an image, and then representing it at the same size as the original means you've magnified it. Pixels are larger in relation to the original. Quality is lessened.
Sorry, but you're all questioning a fact. Any image that has been cropped is lower in resolution than the original image, hence lower in quality.
This is an indisputable fact.
If I take a 8x10 image, and crop it in half to get a 4x5 image, then if I keep it at 4x5 the relative quality will be identical, yes, but if I then enlarge it back to 8x10 I have reduced quality. Even if I do not though, and keep it at 4x5, it contains less pixels than the 8x10 original, and is therefore a lower quality image.
Fact.
And just to be picky, if you crop a 10 x 8 image in half you get a 5 x 8 image (or 10 x 4). but I'm sure you knew that.
Steve smith expressed it perfectly in his post above. (apart from the speling)
"You either lose quality whilst mainatining size or you maintain quality but size is reduced".
Or neither of them were doing much 'thinking' because they both invented crap mechanical systemsOnly if the two people know each other... maybe...
So when Baird and Jenkins were both building their television prototypes at the same time, and demonstrated them publicly in 1925, in different countries, only one of them was doing any thinking?
Stealing the idea from Rosalind Franklin over a pint in The Eagle, Cambridge, more like.Don't forget Watson & Crick..... delivering DNA over a pint in The Eagle, Cambridge!
Stealing the idea from Rosalind Franklin over a pint in The Eagle, Cambridge, more like.
what do you think about this image - the one on the home page
http://davidyarrow.photography
to me it is a very very good image - but is it art? …….. without taking anything away from it …… I would say no
and some of these wonderful shots
http://davidyarrow.photography/gallery/indigenous-communities/
http://davidyarrow.photography/gallery/wildlife/
http://davidyarrow.photography/gallery/new-releases/