Print Story Attention ObviousTroll
Diary
By cam (Mon Mar 09, 2009 at 11:58:38 AM EST) (all tags)
 Megapixel plateau in cameras. 640K is enough for everyone.


 
< Which Button Activates My Kung-Fu Grip? | Citation required >
Attention ObviousTroll | 12 comments (12 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Megapixels by ucblockhead (4.00 / 2) #1 Mon Mar 09, 2009 at 12:16:23 PM EST
Most cameras sold these days take higher megapixel images than their lenses justify. There's not much point of having a 30 megapixel image of a blur.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
Hmmm by yicky yacky (4.00 / 1) #2 Mon Mar 09, 2009 at 12:48:22 PM EST
But who's making larger prints, other than professionals?

This is the main problem I have with digital cameras. Every so often, I take a picture that I think I'd like to have blown up to almost poster size. This is relatively painless with 35mm film, but almost impossible with digital. In the converse case, it's fairly trivial to digitize an analogue print.


----
Vacuity abhors a vacuum.
relatively painless by sasquatchan (4.00 / 1) #3 Mon Mar 09, 2009 at 02:00:38 PM EST
assuming you used 64 or 100 iso film..

I have had ok luck with full page pics using 400 speed, but poster size, I think anything faster than 100 iso, good luck..


[ Parent ]
Well, it's still 'smudgy' close-up. by yicky yacky (4.00 / 1) #4 Mon Mar 09, 2009 at 02:41:32 PM EST

but it's way better than even the best interpolation algorithms.


----
Vacuity abhors a vacuum.
[ Parent ]
Depends on the type of film. by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #11 Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 02:40:38 PM EST
 For film, Ektar 1000 was easily as sharp as most 400s.

An Angry and Flatulent Pig, Trying to Tie Balloon Animals
[ Parent ]
On my wall.. by Driusan (4.00 / 1) #5 Mon Mar 09, 2009 at 05:41:03 PM EST
I have an 12x18" print of a picture I took with my 4 megapixel digital camera. I can't tell the difference between it and a film enlargement at that size and resolution.

--
Vive le Montréal libre.
[ Parent ]
Was it printed by a good shop? by wiredog (4.00 / 1) #6 Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 02:33:58 AM EST
Because 8X10 is really as large as you can get 4MP without obvious pixelation. 6MP is usually the minimum for 12X18. Unless you are observing from 6 or more feet away.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]
I guess I'm mistaken by Driusan (4.00 / 1) #7 Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 03:43:14 AM EST
Someone must have replaced my D40 with a D300 in the same form factor without telling me and then hacked the EXIF data on all the pictures on my memory card before I took that picture.

(It was printed by qoop, the company that has the integration with flickr going on. I have no idea how good they are relative to local shops.)

--
Vive le Montréal libre.

[ Parent ]
This seems sensible by wiredog (4.00 / 1) #8 Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 04:15:53 AM EST
From here, which matches what I've seen elsewhere, 4MP does a decent 11X14 and a good 8X10. 6MP is the minimum for a good 12X18, especially as you'll have to crop to fit. A really good printer could push the limits a bit on that.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]
There are some fractal interpolation algorithms by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #12 Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 02:43:34 PM EST
that do a really good job of hiding the pixels; I suspect the print shops use them as a matter of course these days. 

An Angry and Flatulent Pig, Trying to Tie Balloon Animals
[ Parent ]
It's not that hard... by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #10 Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 02:39:11 PM EST
I've had 8x12s made at CostCo for a couple of bucks each, they looked great.  20x30 prints are available, too - iPhoto will make'em for $15 each.
 

An Angry and Flatulent Pig, Trying to Tie Balloon Animals
[ Parent ]
Some pros have been rumbling about that very point by ObviousTroll (4.00 / 1) #9 Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 02:31:27 PM EST
for the past year or so - pointing to beautiful fine-art prints made with 3 megapixel cameras and so on;

the biggest limiters now are  the size of the sensor  the width of the lens: the lens controls the maximum amount of light that can fall on the sensor and the larger the sensor the more resistant it will be to thermal noise (all things being equal).

But, yeah, it does make me feel a little better that my camera won't be hopelessly out classed in the next 6 months or so.



An Angry and Flatulent Pig, Trying to Tie Balloon Animals
Attention ObviousTroll | 12 comments (12 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback