DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> Print size with 3.2 Megapixel camera.
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 24 of 24, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/02/2005 11:48:42 AM · #1
I have read somewhere that with a 3.2 MP camera, max. size of good quality print(300 dpi)that can be made is about 7 inches x 5 inches only. Is it true?
 11/02/2005 12:02:03 PM · #2
It just depends on what type of quality you need. If it's going to be hanging on your wall, you won't be examining it up close so it won't have to be absolutely perfect. If you were to upsample the image file, and print at about 150 DPI, you would be able to get at least a 10x15 print that will look good hung on the wall.
 11/02/2005 12:03:52 PM · #3
If you lived anywhere near me you'd be welcome to check out the two (slightly cropped even) 30x45cm prints on my wall from the Fuji S602 (with a 3mp SCCD). That is about 12x18 inch.

Depends a bit on the quality of the one who is doing the printing. I used Dixons for those, who used a Belgium Kodak lab. Prints look very good.

Message edited by author 2005-11-02 12:04:30.
 11/02/2005 12:03:59 PM · #4
Not at all. It all depends on the image. A good sharp image from a 3.2 can be taken up to poster size. Granted it doesn't hold well if you get on top of it, but from 5 feet away it will be great. Just remember, billboards are printed with pixels the size of nickels, but when you are viewing it from several hundred feet away looks smooth and continuous.
 11/02/2005 12:04:24 PM · #5
That's about the "native size" at 300 dpi -- which will yield "excellent" results.

However, you can gat a "good" result -- good enough to be approved for selling through DPC Prints at 150 dpi, so you can easily get a good print up to about 11x14.

Of course, if you carefully upsample the image, you can go even larger.
 11/02/2005 12:04:50 PM · #6
I've got a print from my old 3.2mp size was 100cm&70cm
Pretty good looking, and it's hanging in the hallway in our house.
 11/02/2005 12:25:57 PM · #7
My camera has 5.25MP CCD, and a max resolution of 2560 X 1920.What is the maximum quality print dimmension?
 11/02/2005 12:28:53 PM · #8
Originally posted by Giorgio:
My camera has 5.25MP CCD, and a max resolution of 2560 X 1920.What is the maximum quality print dimmension?

Just divide those numbers by 300 or 150 to get the dimensions in inches.
 11/02/2005 12:39:41 PM · #9
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Giorgio:
My camera has 5.25MP CCD, and a max resolution of 2560 X 1920.What is the maximum quality print dimmension?

Just divide those numbers by 300 or 150 to get the dimensions in inches.

thx
 11/02/2005 12:42:12 PM · #10
Here's the complete table of print sizes by pixels from DPC Prints.
 11/02/2005 01:02:06 PM · #11
If you have Photoshop here is a brilliant way of upsizing your images, and I swear to god it really does work.

I doon't have the exact details here as I am in work and am going from memory but, Goto IMAGE SIZE in the EDIT menu and choose to increase by 110% (so you are increasing the image by 10 percent).

You can do this over and over and loose hardly any detail, I don't know why but it really does work. Just stick to increasing by 10 percent each time. I got this from one of my Scott Kelby books, and its how he does it.

Message edited by author 2005-11-02 13:03:10.
 11/02/2005 01:08:26 PM · #12
That's called step-interpolation (or stair-), and people recommend all sorts of percentages -- I usually use 105%. Make sure you are using BiCubic sampling.

But if you are using Photoshop CS (8.0) or later, it is now recommended that you upsize in a single step using the BiCubic Smoother option.
 11/02/2005 01:21:44 PM · #13
My personal experince is that 200dpi is more than enough for a very good wall mount. 150 isn't noticeable unless you put your nose to the photo.
11/02/2005 01:33:45 PM · #14
Originally posted by jonr:
My personal experince is that 200dpi is more than enough for a very good wall mount. 150 isn't noticeable unless you put your nose to the photo.


This is a good point. Quality is so subjective. As photographers we are usually ticky about the print quality, but most people are quite satisfied with anything in the 200dpi range. A VERY few folks might complain on something printed as low as 150, but really, lots of folks are perfectly happy with anything that looks as good as color newsprint from the Sunday paper.

I used to point out the superior quality of my prints and apologized if anything didn't come out just right. However, I soon realized that people just don't care to hear about your picky print issues, as long as it looks good to them they are happy :)
 11/02/2005 11:03:51 PM · #15
Do you need to tell your lab that at what dpi your prints are required to be made? Silly question??
 11/02/2005 11:46:13 PM · #16
Originally posted by richabhatia:
Do you need to tell your lab that at what dpi your prints are required to be made? Silly question??

No, you generally just specify the print size. As long as the aspect ratio is correct, the printer will adjust the resolution to the print size.
 11/03/2005 05:48:12 AM · #17
The file size of jpeg image with a 3.2MP camera, is about 1.5 to 2MB.
Can we increase this file size to say 10MB, by resizing? If yes, how?
 11/03/2005 08:13:34 AM · #18
Originally posted by richabhatia:
The file size of jpeg image with a 3.2MP camera, is about 1.5 to 2MB.
Can we increase this file size to say 10MB, by resizing? If yes, how?

You are looking at the compressed size in JPEG. When you talk about increasing file size, you should either be looking at the number of pixels or the uncompressed size.

For example, that 3.2MP image is 2048x1536 pixels at 24 bits (3bytes)/pixel, and so the uncompressed size is 9MB. Try saving as an uncompressed TIFF and see.

The ultimate size in JPEG will depend not only on the number of pixels, but also the amount of detail in the image and the degree of compression applied.

Message edited by author 2005-11-03 08:14:58.
 11/03/2005 08:20:49 AM · #19
I work for a large scale imaging company.

We have a laser light photo printer that can print an image at 100 dpi and you cannot tell it from a regular photo at 300 dpi with a loupe.

I take photos all day long (clean files) that we have printed at 52 dpi. (4 foot x 5 foot) and you cannot tell it from a normal 5" x 7"

Message edited by author 2005-11-03 12:59:03.
 11/03/2005 11:42:25 PM · #20
Originally posted by GeneralE:

The ultimate size in JPEG will depend not only on the number of pixels, but also the amount of detail in the image and the degree of compression applied.

Thanks a lot. Thats quite an information to me. This answers a lot of questions that I had in my mind.
I have tried saving a file in TIFF format. The file size is about 4 times as compared to JPEG file.
My camera supports JPEG mode only. Should I always save my images in TIFF format(converted from JPEG, using Photoshop)?

Message edited by author 2005-11-03 23:44:47.
 11/04/2005 12:16:21 AM · #21
Originally posted by richabhatia:
Should I always save my images in TIFF format(converted from JPEG, using Photoshop)?

If you use Photoshop, save in its own (PSD) format. That will allow you to maintain all your editing, adjustment layers, etc.

Once I'm done editing, I save a "flattened" version in TIFF, apply any necessary sharpening, and then save that as a JPEG.

I leave the TIFF in the unsharpened state in case I need to go back and re-do it, although that's just a shortcut so I don't have to re-save it from Photoshop. If I need other sizes, it's also easier to re-size the TIFF, sharpen, and save in whatever format is needed then.

I do all the editing on the full-size image, unless it's an "emergency" job. It's easier to re-size the TIFF than the PSD document. Storage space is cheap. For an image I want to enter in a challenge and also print, I'd eventually have (at least) the following files:

-Original Capture (JPEG or TIFF on my cameras)
-Edited Photoshop file (PSD)
-Final Composite (TIFF)
-DPC-sized Composite (TIFF)
-Print image layout (optional, if adding border/caption) (PSD)
-Final Print image (JPEG)
-DPC entry (JPEG)
 11/04/2005 01:57:16 AM · #22
I have some excellent 8"x10" prints from my old Olympus D450 (1.3mp). I found out that it depends much more on the sharpness and lense quality than on the megapixels.
 11/04/2005 02:08:10 AM · #23
Originally posted by GeneralE:

I do all the editing on the full-size image, unless it's an "emergency" job. It's easier to re-size the TIFF than the PSD document.


Why is it easier to resize a TIFF than a PSD? I keep all mine, even the flattened versions, as PSDs. Am I missing something?

Robt.
 11/04/2005 08:22:30 AM · #24
It's only easier than re-sizing a layered PSD file. I also find it easier to keep track of what stage it's at, instead of having PSD files in both layered and flattened versions. The TIFF can also be placed in other programs and printed to some output devices directly, whereas a PSD file has less flexibility in that regard.

My main point was to always have the layered file, a flattened version, and the final print or display JPEG. Whether the intermediate file is PSD or TIFF is pretty immaterial, although the TIFF "system" works even if you're using a different editing program.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 04:32:18 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 04:32:18 AM EDT.