Reviews, updates and in depth guides to your favourite mobile games -
Forum Home Latest Posts Search Help Subscribe

*rant* why I hate digital...

Page: 1 Reply
Jul 22nd 2002#60246 Report
Member since: Nov 14th 2001
Posts: 1297
Don't worry, I love digital, too. But this is just why I hate it.

Digital cameras have screwed up the line in the sand that used to separate professionals and amateurs. This is wonderful and disasterous at the same time. It's great if you are a semi-pro who knows that your camera is nice - but not the world champ Nikon D1X with a $30,000 lens. Disasterous if you are like the 95% of the people who are buying cameras now at a record pace and have *no idea* that they don't have the king cheese camera in their fanny pack just because they dropped a cool hundred on a new camera. They think a picture is a picture and 72 dpi "is plenty" for a really good professional grade photograph. Not the case, granny!

If someone ever asks you for high-resolution digital artwork, as in a prepress or a printing company, *PLEASE* don't just give them a big fat ass .jpg. I've been repeating that for 6 friggin' months with this particular lady, and she still gives me lousy .jpgs and spends 65 bucks a pop to have me enlarge it to poster size, then she proclaims ecstatically: "why is it so blurry?"

My plea? Take the time to save enough money so you don't buy a cracker-jack ass camera. If it looks like *too good* of a deal - "a low, low price of $xx.xx" - it's probably *too good* of a deal to have good quality components and achieve professional-grade results...

anyway, that's my rant. take it or leave it. I feel better!
Reply with Quote Reply
Sep 10th 2002#68511 Report
Member since: Sep 9th 2002
Posts: 49
I'm totally new to the Digital Photography scene. I took my time and looked at reviews of cameras in my price range and ended up getting the Canon Powershot S30 (still hasn't arrived in the mail). I feel that it is a good camera for someone starting out and even for a semi-pro. What makes me different from these other people is that I want to , someday, make professional qualiy images. Not just take pictures of "granny" at the family reunion :D
Reply with Quote Reply
Sep 13th 2002#69096 Report
Member since: Feb 12th 2002
Posts: 271
Hey graphics guy (or anyone). What resolution do you print at for poster size? I have a nikon coolpix 885... it is 3.2 megapixels, so it takes 2048x1536 pics at 72 dpi... which comes out to be like... 28 inches x 21, or so. Would that come out blurry, if i printed it at 28x21 at 72 dpi? Since there would be no enlarging or anything... Or is it a must to print things at 300 dpi? Ok, well thanks in advance.
Reply with Quote Reply
Sep 19th 2002#69904 Report
Member since: Mar 18th 2001
Posts: 1604
at 72 dpi, yes, it'll probably be blurry. i've done 36" x 48" posters at 150 dpi and they look great, you might even be able to to go a bit lower than that. once you get down to 11" x 17" or so you'll need to start increasing resolution again, i did some quickie posters at 150 dpi at 11" x 17" and they looked ok but definitely could've been sharper.

Reply with Quote Reply
Sep 19th 2002#69914 Report
Member since: Jan 1st 1970
A 3.x mega pixel dig camera is only good for about an 8X10 "photo" quality--or at least something like it. Anything above that will start to blur. Maybe not perceptable in itty-bitty steps, but it is degrading the quality none-the-less.

g-guy: I read an interesting book on photography recently. To paraphrase, the author basically said that even a blind squirrel can find a nut occassionally (anyone can get lucky and shoot a beautiful shot). But the difference for a professional is that they understand lighting, framing, subject, exposure, etc., and they can shoot good photographs time and again. They don't miss those opportunities because they're prepared, and know exactly what settings to shoot at to change a snap-shot into art.
Reply with Quote Reply
Sep 21st 2002#70220 Report
Member since: Nov 14th 2001
Posts: 1297
Hey malibu - PM me with more info on that book, eh? thanks man.

GiottoFace, Fig is right. You really should never print anything at 72 dpi. That's exclusively for display purposes, not print.

The main thing to consider in the printing industry is viewing distance. You'd be amazed at how low of a resolution billboards are printed at. (my most recent one was printed at 9 dpi) - Fig's 150 dpi number is probably great for anything 8x10 to 22x28 - provided your viewer isn't going to hand-hold the print. That's when your 300 - 1440 dpi prints look great.
Reply with Quote Reply
Oct 1st 2002#71721 Report
Member since: Feb 12th 2002
Posts: 271
thanks everyone!
Reply with Quote Reply
May 28th 2003#105502 Report
Member since: May 23rd 2003
Posts: 25
when are people going to realize the difference beetween dpi and ppi?

use 72 ppi for display

for printing u need to start with at least a 300 ppi pic for good results

for an 8x10 u need at lease a 3 mp camera for decent results, this will be enough to enlarge it to 8x10 for printing but higher is preferable

you can print a 72 dpi pic at 2800dpi and have it look ok, but not great
Reply with Quote Reply
Page: 1 Back to top
Please login or register above to post in this forum