BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ?

On Feb 11, 9:31 pm, "Albert" <albe... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> With my 8.1 megapixel camera, should I take pictures at the maximum
> setting and then use software to resize them, or should I just set the
> camera to a lower resolution (for example, 2MP) and let the camera do
> the resizing?

If your flash card capacity is not an issue with 8.1mp, then go with
8.1mp. But if the capacity may be an issue, I'd just go with the next
lower resolution. For photos that you think you might need more detail
or cropping, then switch to full mp temporarily. But theoretically,
the camera should be taking an 8.1mp and resampling down to 2mp, which
will still look very good on a screen.
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

Albert wrote:
> Over the past 10 years, I've owned 3 digital cameras--one with 0.3
> megapixels (VGA), another with 2 megapixels and as of last week one
> with 8.1 megapixels.
>
> I normally prefer to view my pictures on my 1280x1024 monitor. I
> rarely print them out. With my old cameras, there was never a
> question of what resolution I would use. I would use the maximum.
> With my 8.1 megapixel camera, should I take pictures at the maximum
> setting and then use software to resize them, or should I just set the
> camera to a lower resolution (for example, 2MP) and let the camera do
> the resizing?
>
> With all three cameras, I've noticed that the maximum resolution
> pictures are blurry, but are considerably sharper when resized (even
> using MS Paint).
>
> I'm going on a cruise in a few weeks. Any opinions?
>
If your camera has a setting for 2mp, you may find that an advantage for
saving space on your flash card, but the options to edit, and crop, the
images will be much poorer than if you had taken them at the full
resolution. Unless you are wealthy enough to return to a scene to take
another picture, capturing all the information you can when you are
there just make sense. You can do editing, cropping, and resizing as
needed when you return. With flash media getting cheaper daily, there
is little reason to skimp on resolution.
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

Scott W wrote:
[]
> I go for resizing afterwards, but also saving the full res version.
> With the full size version you have the option of doing a bit of
> cropping at the same time you resize, and you never know when you
> might want the full resolution for a print somewhere down the road.
> Also keep in mind that displays will be increasing in resolution in
> the years to come so you will likely want to redo the resizing from
> time to time.
>
> Scott

I would agree with Scott's advice - take at full resolution. You may want
to compare the different JPEG quality settings (called "extra fine",
"superfine", "fine", "normal" etc.) and see which you need. Most likely,
you won't be able to see the differences once you get above "fine" - all
you will get are increased file sizes and fewer pictures per card.

The program you use to view the images on your display matters. For best
quality it should resample the images properly from their native size to
the display resolution. Many programs do not resample very well, which
may introduce artefacts (such as steps on near-horizontal lines such as
power lines). The Windows Picture and Fax viewer does resample correctly.

David
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

Bucky wrote:
[]
> If your flash card capacity is not an issue with 8.1mp, then go with
> 8.1mp. But if the capacity may be an issue, I'd just go with the next
> lower resolution. For photos that you think you might need more detail
> or cropping, then switch to full mp temporarily. But theoretically,
> the camera should be taking an 8.1mp and resampling down to 2mp, which
> will still look very good on a screen.


Both number of pixels (resolution) and JPEG compression ("quality"
setting) will affect how many pictures you can fit on a card. Therefore,
it might be worth testing before the OP goes whether 8.1MP at "standard"
quality produces a better image than, say, 5MP at "fine" quality (assuming
the file size is similar for each), when viewed at the conditions to be
used for the final display.

David
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

"Albert" <albert6.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171258286.053308.174950@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Over the past 10 years, I've owned 3 digital cameras--one with 0.3
> megapixels (VGA), another with 2 megapixels and as of last week one
> with 8.1 megapixels.
>
> I normally prefer to view my pictures on my 1280x1024 monitor. I
> rarely print them out. With my old cameras, there was never a
> question of what resolution I would use. I would use the maximum.
> With my 8.1 megapixel camera, should I take pictures at the maximum
> setting and then use software to resize them, or should I just set the
> camera to a lower resolution (for example, 2MP) and let the camera do
> the resizing?
>
> With all three cameras, I've noticed that the maximum resolution
> pictures are blurry, but are considerably sharper when resized (even
> using MS Paint).
>
> I'm going on a cruise in a few weeks. Any opinions?
>
I agree with the others on shooting at the largest size. The image file is
your digital negative so to speak. It is easy to go from larger to smaller.
It is not possible to go from 2mp to 8mp and get 8mp worth of resolution. If
space is a concern, leave resolution high and set the camera's compression
higher if it offers such a setting.
-S
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

Albert wrote:
> Over the past 10 years, I've owned 3 digital cameras--one with 0.3
> megapixels (VGA), another with 2 megapixels and as of last week one
> with 8.1 megapixels.
>
> I normally prefer to view my pictures on my 1280x1024 monitor. I
> rarely print them out. With my old cameras, there was never a
> question of what resolution I would use. I would use the maximum.
> With my 8.1 megapixel camera, should I take pictures at the maximum
> setting and then use software to resize them, or should I just set the
> camera to a lower resolution (for example, 2MP) and let the camera do
> the resizing?
>
> With all three cameras, I've noticed that the maximum resolution
> pictures are blurry, but are considerably sharper when resized (even
> using MS Paint).
>
> I'm going on a cruise in a few weeks. Any opinions?
>
I would go for the large picture. Remembering how monitors have changed
in the last years, "next year" we may a 4880X 4000 monitor that will use
the full 8/1 megapixels. You will then want the large picture.

--
Keith Nuttle
3110 Marquette Court
Indianapolis, IN 46268
317-802-0699
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

Everybody who's recommended big is probably right. The only possible
reason you might want small is if it reduces your lag between shots. It
should be easy for you to experiment with your camera and see if it
does. That's the only meaningful advantage small might have.

--

http://ourdoings.com/ Easily organize and disseminate news and
photos for your family or group.
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

Suddenly, without warning, Albert exclaimed (12-Feb-07 3:01 PM):
> Over the past 10 years, I've owned 3 digital cameras--one with 0.3
> megapixels (VGA), another with 2 megapixels and as of last week one
> with 8.1 megapixels.
>
> I normally prefer to view my pictures on my 1280x1024 monitor. I
> rarely print them out. With my old cameras, there was never a
> question of what resolution I would use. I would use the maximum.
> With my 8.1 megapixel camera, should I take pictures at the maximum
> setting and then use software to resize them, or should I just set the
> camera to a lower resolution (for example, 2MP) and let the camera do
> the resizing?
>
> With all three cameras, I've noticed that the maximum resolution
> pictures are blurry, but are considerably sharper when resized (even
> using MS Paint).
>
> I'm going on a cruise in a few weeks. Any opinions?
>

Big, definitely big. You can shrink them later, and you can use all
those MP to crop down when needed, especially if you don't have a long
zoom. You can't recover pixels you don't have, if you get that perfect
shot and want to print it at 8x10 or larger... or need to crop down for
that dolphin that was a bit too far out for your zoom. Get a bigger, or
second, card if you need to. Definitely big.

On a good camera, max resolution shouldn't be blurry.

jmc
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

>I normally prefer to view my pictures on my 1280x1024 monitor. I
>rarely print them out. With my old cameras, there was never a
>question of what resolution I would use. I would use the maximum.
>With my 8.1 megapixel camera, should I take pictures at the maximum
>setting and then use software to resize them, or should I just set the
>camera to a lower resolution (for example, 2MP) and let the camera do
>the resizing?

If you're 100% sure that you're only going to view your pictures,
cropped as you shot them, on a monitor, there's little reason to shoot
at a higher resolution. But the higher resolution can be used for at
least two things.

1. The higher resolution gives you the option of getting a good print
from your picture.

2. Resolution can be seen as a trade-off against higher zoom. For
example, 8MPix at 100mm gives you about the same as 2MPix at 200mm.

-Joel

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weekly Torah reading for any website: http://www.lashon.net/Parashah.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ? 

On Feb 11, 9:31 pm, "Albert" <albe... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> Over the past 10 years, I've owned 3 digital cameras--one with 0.3
> megapixels (VGA), another with 2 megapixels and as of last week one
> with 8.1 megapixels.
>
> I normally prefer to view my pictures on my 1280x1024 monitor. I
> rarely print them out. With my old cameras, there was never a
> question of what resolution I would use. I would use the maximum.
> With my 8.1 megapixel camera, should I take pictures at the maximum
> setting and then use software toresizethem, or should I just set the
> camera to a lower resolution (for example, 2MP) and let the camera do
> the resizing?
>
> With all three cameras, I've noticed that the maximum resolution
> pictures are blurry, but are considerably sharper when resized (even
> using MS Paint).
>
> I'm going on a cruise in a few weeks. Any opinions?


Albert -

It's very strange that your high-rez images are blurry until you
resize them. What are you using to view the images? I'm guessing
Windows Picture and Fax Viewer? If this is the case, make sure to
choose the option "Show actual size." This should then blow up the
picture and make it crystal clear.

As others have stated, higher rez is much better because you can
always resize to a smaller image and keep a great deal of the quality,
but the reverse is not true.

If you have a need to resize your high-rez images down to something
small enough for email try using PictureGirdle. Its a free app that
will process hundreds of images with one click. I wrote it because I
too have huge images and I got tired of manually resizing them just
for email. This is really easy to use and it does not over-write the
originals.

Its at http://www.picturegirdle.com
to see how it works go to http://www.picturegirdle.com/HowToUse/pictureGirdle.php

Scrammit
 >> Stay informed about: BIG pictures or SMALL pictures ?