1200dpi from a Nikon D300? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/05/2008 03:22:54 PM · #1

I have a gig this Saturday I need to take photographs for a well known magazine. I know I have the skill... but do I have the equipment?
They said they NEED to get 1200dpi for 8x11" (A4). Can I get this from my Nikon D300? I have CS3 and capture NX.
Please, I need your help!

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

03/05/2008 03:32:05 PM · #2

That would be a vertical resolution of 12424 pixels... about triple the vertical resolution of Canon's 21mp EOS-1Ds Mark III, and much higher than even waterless printing requirements. Either the specifications are wrong, or you would have to scale up from ANY digital camera.

For reference, 8x11" @ 1200 dpi is 9600 x 12424 pixels, while the output of a 39 megapixel Hasselblad is 5412x7212 pixels.

Message edited by author 2008-03-05 15:40:30.

PhotoDave

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

03/05/2008 03:45:12 PM · #3

LOL I agree with scalvert, even a high end mag printed on GOOD paper will only need MAX 300dpi even that can be overkill and anything higher is just a waste of storage space and wasted time for the RIP to process the image to plates/negatives for the press. Most likely if its a high production mag it could be printed on a web press which has an even lower requirement for image resolution. I wish I still had my sample prints from when I was in advertising as on one 4 colour process job I had extra space on one of the sheets and did my own little experiment with printing and resolutions where I had the same image at 50, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350 and 400dpi and from 200 and up there was very little difference to the naked eye and even at 150 it was pretty good for most jobs and subsiquently I ended up running most of my jobs at 250 and that was more than adequate for 90% of the print jobs...

-dave

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/05/2008 03:50:19 PM · #4

To follow up on David's post, most high-end magazines are printed with a halftone screen of either 133lpi or 150lpi, and the proper resolution in those cases would be double the line screen (266dpi or 300dpi).

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

03/05/2008 04:32:01 PM · #5

Originally posted by scalvert:

I am wondering if that's what they think I'll be shooting with... In that case, forget it. Heck, I am doing it for free...FREE!!! Anyways, I will just plan to scale up.

_eug

Nikon D50

03/05/2008 04:45:28 PM · #6

Originally posted by ben4345:

Originally posted by scalvert:
That would be a vertical resolution of 12424 pixels... about triple the vertical resolution of Canon's 21mp EOS-1Ds Mark III, and much higher than even waterless printing requirements. Either the specifications are wrong, or you would have to scale up from ANY digital camera.

For reference, 8x11" @ 1200 dpi is 9600 x 12424 pixels, while the output of a 39 megapixel Hasselblad is 5412x7212 pixels.

I am wondering if that's what they think I'll be shooting with... In that case, forget it. Heck, I am doing it for free...FREE!!! Anyways, I will just plan to scale up.

Wrong answer. The correct answer is to get in communication with the person you are responsible to. Tell them something is off in the specs. It doesn't make sense.

Get the specs clarified. That's the professional thing to do.

Oh and your camera is fine. If they won't accept the results unscaled from a D300, do you really want that gig?

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/05/2008 04:50:56 PM · #7

Originally posted by _eug:

Originally posted by ben4345:

Originally posted by scalvert:
That would be a vertical resolution of 12424 pixels... about triple the vertical resolution of Canon's 21mp EOS-1Ds Mark III, and much higher than even waterless printing requirements. Either the specifications are wrong, or you would have to scale up from ANY digital camera.

For reference, 8x11" @ 1200 dpi is 9600 x 12424 pixels, while the output of a 39 megapixel Hasselblad is 5412x7212 pixels.

I am wondering if that's what they think I'll be shooting with... In that case, forget it. Heck, I am doing it for free...FREE!!! Anyways, I will just plan to scale up.

Wrong answer. The correct answer is to get in communication with the person you are responsible to. Tell them something is off in the specs. It doesn't make sense.

Get the specs clarified. That's the professional thing to do.

Oh and your camera is fine. If they won't accept the results unscaled from a D300, do you really want that gig?

Already one step ahead of you. I e-mail the gal to double check.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

03/05/2008 04:51:33 PM · #8

Originally posted by _eug:

If they won't accept the results unscaled from a D300, do you really want that gig?

What he said. Many pros work with far less capable cameras for magazine publication.

Sigma 70-200 /2.8 APO EX DG Macro HSM II

03/05/2008 04:59:57 PM · #9

Seitz 6x17?

Eyesup

Nikon D300

03/05/2008 05:04:35 PM · #10

well that's all fine and dandy... if you have $30,000 laying around

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

03/05/2008 05:46:31 PM · #11

Her response:
Yes, that is correct. Thanks, ***

my message to her:
At 01:35 PM 3/5/2008, you wrote:

Hello ***,
Thanks again, I will be there.
Just need to double check on the photo requirements, 1200dpi for 8x11" inches?
Thanks
*********
*************

Message edited by author 2008-03-05 17:47:38.

_eug

Nikon D50

03/05/2008 05:50:59 PM · #12

Originally posted by ben4345:

Your response, "But that really doesn't make any sense. Are you sure you don't mean 1200 pixel maximum dimension, not 1200 dpi?"

scarbrd

Leica M10

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

03/05/2008 05:55:59 PM · #13

They still don't understand what they are asking.

Besides, dpi is a printer term, Dots Per Inch.

Camera resolution is measured numbers of pixels, and not by the inch.

I bet they want to print the image on a 1200 dpi printer at 8x11 inches.

In which case, your camera is fine.

Message edited by author 2008-03-05 17:57:01.